AUGUSTANA    .    LIBRARY   .    PUBLICATIONS 

^"  NUMBER  8 


BS 

1325 

.2 

B74 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS 


IN  THE 


HEBREW 

OF  THE 

BOOKS  OF  SAMUEL 


BV 


OTTO  H.  BOSTROM,  Ph.  D. 


PUBLISKED 

BT  THE  AUTHOEITY  OF  THE  BOARD  OF  OnCECTOBS  OF 

AUGUSTANA  COLLEGE  ANTI  THEOLOGICAL  SEKINABY 

BOCK  ISLAM  O,  ILLINOIS 


ROCK  ISLAND,  ILL. 

AT7GUSTANA  BOOK  OONCEEN,  PBINTEBS 
1918 


AUGUSTANA    .    LIBRARY   .    PUBLICATIONS 

^'  NUMBER  8 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS 

IN  THE 

HEBREW 

OF  THE 

BOOKS  OF  SAMUEL 

BY 

OTTO  H.  BOSTROM,  Ph.  D. 


PUBLISHED  . 

BY  THE  AUTHOEITY  OF  THE  BOABD  OF  DIKECTOBS  OF 

AUOUSTANA  COLLEGE  ANn  THEOLOGICAL  SKMINABY 

BOCK  ISLAND,  HJIJNOIS 


ROCK  ISLAND,  ILL. 

AUQUSTANA  BOOK  CONCERN,  PBINTKBS 
1918 


f- 

UBRARyOFPRINSnm 


OCT  I- 


THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 


A 


AUGUSTANA    .    LIBRARY   .    PUBLICATIONS 

NUMBER  8 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS 

IN   1  HE 

HEBREW 

OF  THE 

BOOKS  OF  SAMUEL 

BY 

OTTO  H.  BOSTROM,  Ph.  D. 


PUBLISHED 

BY  THE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  BOARD  OF  DIRECTORS  OF 

AUGUSTANA  COLLEGE  AND  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 

BOCK   ISLAND,   ILLINOIS 


ROCK  ISLAND,  ILL. 

AUGUSTANA  BOOK   CONCERN,  PRINTERS 
1918 


AUGUSTANA  LIBRARY  PUBLICATIONS 


No. 

U     The  Mechanical  Composition  of  Wind  Deposits,  by  Johan 
August  Udden. 

2.  An  Old  Indian  Village,  by  Johan  August  Udden. 

3.  The  Idyl  in  German  Literature,  by  Gustav  Albert  Andreen. 

4.  On  the  Cyclonic  Distribution  of  Rainfall,  by  Johan  Aueust 
Udden. 

5.  Fossil  Mastodon  and  Mammoth  Remains  in  Illinois  and  Iowa, 
by  Netta  C.  Anderson, 

and 
Proboscidean  Fossils  of  the  Pleistocene  Deposits  in  Illinois 
and  Iowa,  by  Johan  August  Udden. 

6.  Scandinavians  Who  Have  Contributed  to  the  Knowledge  of 
the  Flora  of  North  America,  by  Per  Axel  Rydberg,  Ph.  D., 

and 
A  Geological  Survey  of  the  Lands  Belonging  to  the  New  York 
and  Texas  Land  Company,  Ltd.,  in  the  Upper  Rio  Grande 
Embayment  in  Texas,  by  Johan  August  Udden. 

7.  Genesis  and  Development  of  Sand  Formations  on  Marine 
Coasts,  by  Pehr  Olsson-Seffer,  Ph.  D., 

and 
The  Sand  Strand  Flora  of  Marine  Coasts,  by  Pehr  Olsson- 
Seffer,  Ph.  D. 


TO  MY  TEACHER, 

PROFESSOR  CHARLES  C.  TORREY, 

IN  APPRECIATION  OF  HIS  CONSTANT  INTEREST 

AND  UNTIRING  AID 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

Preface  9 

Introduction   11 

The  alternative  readings  indicated  by  the  Qere  and 

Ketib 11 

Alternative  readings  not  noted  in  the  margin  by  the 

Massoretes   16 

Some  general  rules  that  are  found  to  have  guided  the 
Massoretes  in  their  method  of  combining  alterna- 
tive readings  21 

Cases  of  Special  importance 23 

Alternative  readings  in  the  First  Book  of  Samuel.  . .  26 

Alternative  readings  in  the  Second  Book  of  Samuel.  .  45 


Prel 


ace. 


ERRATA. 

Page  18,  line    4 

nC^      should  be       DP^^ 

T                                                                       T 

"     18, 
"     20, 

'     24 
'    10 

TT 

.     "                b^. 

"     20, 

'    16 

b^        - 

-                   W 

"     23, 

'     25 

D^^b^r}     " 

"  D"^^'':5^*n 

"     24, 

'     17 

Tj^^lJiD 

"    "^^^^^ 

"     24, 

'     32 

n^?! 

"       HvXl 

"     40, 

'      3 

T   •/ 

"     52, 

'     15 

3^'1 

y\z^ 

"     54, 

'    16 

yni 

"    ^1? 

"     59, 

''    23 

n\^bwn     " 

"  r^tnb^n 

Massoretic  margin  is  silent. 

That  certain  general  rules  have  been  followed  in  the 
making  of  these  combinations. 
Baer's  edition  of  the  Massoretic  text  of  the  Books  of  Samuel 
has  been  used  as  the  basis  of  this  work,  but  a  few  cases  also  of 


'  I  am  greatly  indebted  to  Professor  Torrey  for  his  interest  in  this  investi- 
gation and  for  his  kindness  in  giving  suggestions  that  have  proven  invaluable. 

Library  Publications.     1. 


10  PREFACE. 

Qere  and  Ketih  not  included  in  this  edition,  but  occurring  in 
certain  manuscripts,  have  been  discussed. 

Wherever  the  terms  "text"  and  "margin"  have  been  used  in 
opposition  they  refer  respectively  to  the  consonant  text  and  to 
the  Massoretic  marginal  note. 

In  addition  to  the  passages  discussed  in  the  following  pages, 
the  Books  of  Samuel  contain  a  large  number  of  cases  of  Qere 
and  Ketib  of  a  simpler  and  less  interesting  type,  where  the  dif- 
ference between  the  two  readings  is  merely  orthographic,  or  due 
to  some  accident  of  transcription ;  or  where  a  euphemistic  substi- 
tution has  been  made.  In  most  instances  it  is  evidently  possible 
to  defend  either  reading.  Thus  for  example  "jH/t^  and^jH/'^Sli^ 
I  Sam.  1 :  17 ;  IS^^  and  ?Dm3,  8:3;  DPl^  and  Qr\3,  H :  9- 

:  -  T    T 

I  have  not  thought  it  necessary  to  treat  these  cases  here,  though 
they  doubtless  usually  represent  the  combination  of  two  manu- 
script traditions.  I  give  here  a  list  of  them,  together  with  a  few 
passages  in  which  it  seems  to  me  that  the  testimony  of  the 
ancient  Versions  gives  ground  for  supposing  that  our  M.  T. 
includes  more  than  one  reading.    The  list  is  as  follows : 

I  Sam.  1 :  17 ;  2 :  9,  10 ;  3  :  2, 18 ;  4 :  15 ;  5  :  6 ;  7  :  9 ;  8 :  3 ;  9 :  1, 
26 ;  10 :  7,  21 ;  11 :  6,  9 ;  13  :  8,  19 ;  14 :  27 ;  15  :  6,  16 ;  17 :  7,  23,  41 
18 :  6,  7,  9,  14,  22,  28 ;  19 :  18 ;  21 :  12 ;  22  :  15,  17,  18 ;  23 :  5 ;  24 

5,  9,  19;  25:  3,  18,  18;  26:  8,  22;  27:  4,  8;  28:  8,  24;  29:  5;  30 

6,  24.  II  Sam.  1 :  8,  11,  16 ;  2 :  2 ;  3  :  2,  3,  12,  15 ;  5 :  1 ;  6 :  23  ;  8 :  3 
11:  1,  24;  12:  9,  20,  24;  13:  8,  32,  33,  34,  37;  14:  7,  22,  30;  15 
20,  28;  16:  8,  10,  12,  12,  15,  18,  23;  17:  12;  18:  8,  12,  13,  17,  20 
19 :  7,  14,  19,  41,  41 ;  20 :  8,  9,  14,  23,  25 ;  21 :  6,  9,  12,  16,  20,  21 
22 :  8,  15,  23,  33,  34,  40,  51 ;  23 :  8,  9,  9,  9,  15,  16,  20,  20,  21,  33,  35 
37;  24:  10.  11,  14,  16,22. 


Introduction. 


While  the  Qere  and  Ketih  in  the  Old  Testament  have  hitherto 
been  considered  to  be  mistakes  or  alleged  mistakes  corrected  by 
the  Massoretes,  a  study  of  the  marginal  notes  in  the  Hebrew  of 
the  Books  of  Samuel  —  or,  no  doubt,  of  any  representative  por- 
tion of  the  Old  Testament  —  makes  clear  that  this  view  must 
be  revised.  The  numerous  instances  also  in  these  books  of  alter- 
native readings  which  have  not  been  commented  upon  by  the 
Massoretes  throw  valuable  light  on  the  question  of  Qere  and 
Ketib  and  should  be  examined  side  by  side  with  the  Massoretic 
margin. 


I.    THE  ALTERNATIVE   READINGS   INDICATED   BY 
THE   QBRE  AND  KETIB. 

1.      At  present  commonly  CONSiDERED  ERRORS  CORRECTED  BY 

THE  Massoretes. 

It  has  been  customary  to  translate  the  word  Ketib  "that  which 
is  written"  and  Qere  "to  be  read"   (Ges.,  §17,  footnote:  """Ip  is 

passive  participle,  legendum) .  Kautsch  in  his  Gramm.  des  Bibl- 
Aram.,  p.  81,  note,  translates  Qere  "das  gelesene  oder  zu  lesende". 
Ginsburg,  Intr.,  p.  183,  says :  "The  Massorites  have  decided  that 
the  marginal  Keri  is  the  correct  reading",  but  does  not  otherwise 
translate  the  word  Qere  directly.  Caspar  Levias,  in  the  Jewish 
Encyclopedia  under  "Masorah",  paraphrases  Qere  "to  be  read". 
Thus,  the  generally  accepted  view  is,  that  the  Massoretes,  where 
they  discountenanced  or  considered  incorrect  the  reading  con- 
tained in  the  text,  placed  a  Qere  in  the  margin  against  the  word 
or  words  in  question  and  added  there  the  reading  that  was  by 
them  considered  correct  or  preferable.  The  commentators  have 
treated  the  Qere  and  Ketlb  in  accordance  with  this  view,  and 
speak  of  the  Qere  as  a  correction,  now  needed,  now  mistaken, 


12  INTRODUCTION. 

and  sometimes  "unnecessary"  (Driver,  Notes  on  Samuel,  the 
note  on  II  S.  12 :  22 ;  H.  P.  Smith,  II  S.  12 :  24) . 

The  reason  for  this  view  of  the  Qere  and  Ket^b  is  the  fact  that 
the  root  ^^p  means  "to  read"  (out  loud).  It  has  been  argued: 
if  the  v7ord  that  the  Massoretes  put  in  the  margin  was  actually 
read  out  loud  at  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures  instead  of  the  word 
written  in  the  text,  it  must  have  been  considered  preferable  to 
the  reading  of  the  text.     But  ^*lp   is  the  passive  participle  of 

this  verb,  and  must  be  translated  "read",  just  as  ^^r\2  is  trans- 
lated "written";  but  no  tense  or  modal  force  must  be  ascribed 
to  it. 

2.    The  use  of  the  terms  Qere  and  Ketlh. 

Qere  may  or  may  not  have  invariably  been  read  in  preference 
to  the  consonant  text;  that  cannot  be  determined;  but  several 
circumstances  can  be  brought  forward  to  show  that  Qere  and 
Ketlh  were  not  always  intended  to  distinguish  between  that 
which  was  written  in  the  text  and  that  which  was  read  out  loud, 
or  should  be  read  out  loud. 

Ginsburg,  Intr.,  p.  187  ff.,  shows  that  in  many  cases  the  Qere 
and  the  Sehh-  were  interchangeable.  Where  one  MS.  had  Qere 
another  would  have  Sehir,  and  vice  versa.  In  fact,  where  one 
MS.  had  Qere  another  would  have  Sebir,  and  still  a  third  would 
have  a  note  to  the  effect  that  the  Eastern  reading  was  the  same 
as  respectively  the  Qere  and  the  Sebir  of  the  first  two.  This 
suggests  that  the  three  marginal  notes,  though  called  with  dif- 
ferent names,  all  had  the  same  purpose  —  to  record,  beside  the 
reading  in  the  text,  an  alternative.  Furthermore  it  has  been 
shown  that  the  Qere  and  the  Ketib  of  one  MS.  have  been  reversed 
in  another,  so  that  what  is  Qere  in  one  is  Ketib  in  another,  and 
vice  versa;  e.  g.  II  S.  14 :  21,  where  ^ri^t^*^  and  ri^C^'17  take  turns 

•        •      T  T       •      T 

as  Qere  and  Ketib  in  different  MSS.  One  is  on  this  account  led 
to  suspect  that  the  words  Qere  and  Ketib,  if  not  originally  arbi- 
trarily chosen  to  designate  alternative  readings  in  a  given  pas- 
sage, at  least  are  very  often  used  in  such  capacity  with  less  of 
their  literal  meaning. 

a.    Qere  lost  its  sense  of  "read  out  loud". 


INTRODUCTION.  13 

That  the  Qere  had  lost  its  meaning  ''read  out  loud",  as  distinct 
from  that  which  was  "written",  can  be  seen  from  the  fact  that 
many  words  are  supplied  with  a  Qei-e  in  the  margin,  though  they 
would  sound  exactly  the  same  whether  read  out  loud  according 
to  the  textual  reading  or  according  to  the  marginal  note.  For 
instance  in  I  S.  2 :  3  r\*hbv  U^H^  *h]  "and  by  him  actions  are 

weighed"  is  the  Qere;  and  r])bbv  UDH^  ^b]    "though  actions 

be  not  weighed"  is  the  Ketib.  ^b,  the  negative,  and  ib,  the  pre- 
position with  the  suffix  3rd  pers.  masc.  sing.,  would,  as  far  as 
we  know,  sound  alike  in  pronunciation.  And  while  it  may  be 
objected  that  the  tone  of  voice  of  the  reader  would  be  different 
in  each  case,  depending  on  whether  he  understood  the  passage 
according  to  the  Q.  or  the  K.,  it  should  be  pointed  out  that  in 
both  cases,  if  we  are  allowed  to  judge  by  our  sense  of  emphasis, 
the  word  in  question  would  have  the  strongest  accent  of  the 
whole  clause.  Another  instance  is  I  S.  25:  8,  where  we  have 
)^2  in  the  text.  It  is  in  some  MSS.  the  subject  of  a  marginal 
note  which  tells  us  that  the  Qere  is  ^JiO.    It  is  well  known  and 

T 

generally  admitted  that  ^^  quiesced  in  many  cases,  becoming 
"merely  a  sign  of  the  preceding  long  vowel"  (Ges.  23') .  In  this 
case  then,  the  Qere  does  not  direct  the  reader  to  pronounce  the 
word  in  any  way  different  from  that  of  the  Ketib,  for  even  with- 
out the  marginal  note,  and  in  all  likelihood  even  without  the  vowel- 
points,  the  readers  for  whom  these  MSS.  were  intended  would 
pronounce  the  vowel  following  the  3  just  as  long  as  if  they  saw 
the  ^^  actually  written  in  the  text.  The  cases  of  the  quiescing  {<, 
where  the  text  lacks  it  and  the  margin  supplies  it,  are  quite 
numerous ;  e.  g.  I  S.  28 :  24 ;  II  S.  2  :  2 ;  19 :  14 ;  20 :  9 ;  etc.  They 
furnish  convincing  proof  that  the  distinction  made  by  the  Mas- 
soretes  between  Qere  and  Ketib  was  one  that  cannot  be  ade- 
quately expressed  by  the  translation  of  the  words,  "that  which 
is  written"  and  "that  which  is  read". 

b.  Ketib  is  not  always  "that  which  is  written"  (namely,  "writ- 
ten" as  the  standard  consonant  text),  but  sometimes  an  alter- 
native reading  which  makes  sense,  and  which  can  be  found  by  a 
study  of  the  details  of  the  text  and  the  marginal  note. 


14  INTRODUCTION. 

While  we  can  almost  always  be  certain  of  what  constituted 
the  Qere,  both  as  to  consonants  and  vowels,  the  Ketlb  is  more  or 
less  an  unknown  quantity.  If  we  insist  that  the  Ketib  must  be 
that  which  is  ivritten  in  the  consonant  text,  exactly  that  and 
neither  more  nor  less,  it  will  in  many  cases  remain  an  unknown 
quantity;  for  the  consonant  text  very  often  brings  together 
letters  into  a  combination  which  is  impossible  to  vocalize  or 
classify  as  being  one  form  or  another  of  any  Hebrew  word ;  e.  g. 
niDCJ  in  I  S.  15:  9;  ^n^^^Pl  in  1  S.  25:  34,  etc.  But  if  it  be 
recognized  that  by  Ketlb  was  meant  in  most  cases  something  that 
makes  sense  and  a  possible  construction,  and  that  what  is  found 
actually  written  in  the  text  is  a  combination  of  the  Qere  and  the 
Ketib,  then  the  unknown  quantity  can  almost  invariably  be  found 
by  careful  analysis  of  the  seemingly  impossible  textual  reading, 
A  good  example  of  this  kind  of  combination  is  found  in  II  S. 
19 :  32  p-1^3  n^^  in  ^'^■^5  "to  conduct  him  over  the  Jordan" 
(R.  v.).  The  Qere,  according  to  the  margin,  is  ]'n*}Ti  PNl,  the 
same  construction  as  we  find  in  vv.  37  and  40.  The  Ketib,  if  we 
mean  that  which  is  written  in  the  consonant  text,  is  "destitute 
of  all  philological  analogy,  and,  in  fact,  meaningless"  (Driver, 
Notes  on  Samuel,  ad  loc.) .  But  Driver  recognizes  that  we  have 
here  "a  mixture  of  two  readings",  giving  one  as  ]Tn^3  as  in  v, 
19,  the  other  one  being  the  Qere.  G  B  has  iKirifjuj/aL  airov  rbv  'lop8dvr]v, 
and  G  L  has  TrpoTre/xi/^ui  airov  €k  tov  'lopSdvov,  thus  Substantiating  the 
supposition  that  two  traditions  existed.  That  the  present  Hebrew 
text  in  this  passage  is  not  an  accident  or  a  mistake  which  has 
been  corrected  in  the  marginal  note,  but  rather  an  intentional 
preservation  of  two  different  readings  in  the  MSS.,  seems  beyond 
the  possibility  of  contradiction. 

Did  the  Massoretes  by  calling  p"l^j"nN  the  "Qere"  wish  to 
show  their  preference  for  this  reading?  That  is  a  question  which 
is  hard,  if  not  impossible,  to  answer.  But  it  is  to  be  noted  that 
the  reading  of  the  two  which  most  closely  resembles  that  ivhich 
is  ivritten  here  happens  to  be  given  as  the  Qere. 

Another  passage  worthy  of  note  in  this  connection  is  II  S.  5 :  2, 

where  the  text  has  ^n^^"!  nHv^  )Tb]j  ribi^  b)^^  nVHB 

-    T      •  T  T    -  ••  T  I-.    V  T  :      • 


INTRODUCTION.  15 

^5^~lt^*^"n5<  ^2?2m  ^<^l»i?^-  If  we  consider  the  consonant  text 
here  as  it  stands,  it  becomes  plain  that  the  construction  is  im- 
possible, because  "the  words  are  wrongly  divided"  (Driver,  ad 
loc).  The  Qere  therefore  directs  us  to  connect  the  final  n  of 
rin''''n  with  the  following  word,  making  {^^yli^n  determined  as 
well  as  "i^I^n^which  would  give  us  correct  Hebrew,  Butthe  n  could 
very  well  be  left  at  the  end  of  the  word  ^^''^"l.     We  have  several 

instances  of  such  full  writing;  e.  g.  I  S.  15:^3;  II  S.  2:  26  (Cf. 
Ges.  44-).  And  the  construction  would  be  in  harmony  with 
Hebrew  style  just  as  well,  if  both  the  participles,  ^5^^i^2  and 
^'2a2-:  were  undetermined.  We  would  then  have  a  compound  verb 
form,  HTi  with  a  participle,  denoting  customary  action  in  past 

T  T 

time  (Ges.  116').  Of  course,  in  this  case  the  H  preceding  ^yQ 
would  have  to  be  deleted.  Without  the  Qere,  however,  either  of 
the  two  remedies  would  suggest  itself  just  as  readily.  There 
would  be  a  shade  of  difference  in  meaning  between  the  two 
constructions.  The  Qere  is :  "thou  wast  the  one  leading  out  and 
bringing  in  Israel".  The  alternate  reading  would  mean:  "thou 
wast  leading  out  and  bringing  in  Israel",  or  with  more  emphasis 
on  the  customary  action :  "thou  was't  wont  to  lead  out  and  bring 
in  Israel".  Here,  too,  if  we  take  Ketlb  in  its  literal  meaning, 
"that  which  is  written",  it  makes  no  sense;  and  the  construction 
called  the  Qere  is  about  as  nearly  like  "that  which  is  written" 
as  is  the  reading  which  constitutes  the  other  element  of  the 
combination. 


II.     ALTERNATIVE   READINGS  NOT  NOTED  IN  THE 
MARGIN    BY  THE  MASSORETES. 

Examples  of  the  kind  mentioned  above,  where  the  consonant 
text  itself,  even  without  the  vowel  points  and  without  the  Mas- 
soretic  margin,  bears  plain  evidence  of  combination,  are  very 
valuable  for  the  argument  of  this  investigation,  inasmuch  as 
they  furnish  a  link  between  the  class  of  alternative  readings 
commonly  called  Qere  and  Ketih  and  the  great  mass  of  cases 


16  INTRODUCTION. 

where  two  different  readings  have  been  combined  without  any 
marginal  explanatory  note.  The  two  passages  just  cited  differ 
from  the  majority  of  the  cases  of  Qere  and  Ketib  in  this  respect, 
that  here  the  two  combined  readings  are  plain  to  the  reader 
without  the  marginal  note,  while  in  most  cases  where  the  Mas- 
soretes  have  given  aid  the  note  or  the  vowel  points  or  both  are 
necessary  to  show  that  combination  has  taken  place:  the  con- 
sonants alone  cannot  make  this  apparent.  A  great  many  cases 
of  this  most  common  kind  of  Qere  and  Ketib  will  be  discussed 
in  the. following  pages  and  no  special  examples  need  be  pointed 
out  —  they  are  found  in  almost  every  chapter  of  the  two  books 
under  discussion.  But  in  other  places  the  text  bears  unmis- 
takable evidence  of  combination  and  furnishes  certain  clues  to 
the  component  readings,  while  the  margin  is  silent.  This  class 
of  alternative  readings  has  not  hitherto  been  generally  recog- 
nized, though  it  is  fully  as  important  as  the  Qere  and  Ketib  and 
is  similar  in  purpose  to  these. 

1.    Cases  where  the  alternative  readings  have  been  put 

INTO  A  combination  SUFFICIENTLY  INTELLIGIBLE  TO  MAKE  A 
MARGINAL  NOTE  UNNECESSARY. 

By  comparisons  of  examples  representing  the  two  classes  of 
alternative  readings,  those  noted  in  the  margin  by  the  Masso- 
retes,  and  those  not  so  noted,  the  following  becomes  plain.  When 
a  MS.  was  copied,  the  copyist  often  had  recourse  to  two  or  more 
different  readings  of  certain  passages  in  the  book  he  was  to 
copy.  Whether  or  not  he  always  decided  in  his  own  mind  which 
of  the  different  readings  he  preferred,  is  of  course  impossible 
to  say.  But  what  he  often  did  was  this:  he  combined  two,  or 
perhaps  sometimes  more,  readings  in  the  text.  Where  this  com- 
bination could  be  affected  in  such  a  way  as  would  make  clear 
to  the  intelligence  of  the  average  reader  the  two  different  read- 
ings combined,  the  copyist  would  not  as  a  rule  make  a  marginal 
note  of  Qere.  On  the  other  hand,  where  such  a  combination 
could  not  be  made,  and  where  consequently  one  of  the  readings 
would  otherwise  be  lost  to  the  reader,  the  copyist  would  as  a 
rule  make  a  marginal  note,  which  together  with  the  text  itself 
should  preserve  the  two  readings.  Of  course,  it  should  be  re- 
membered, that  some  of  the  cases  of  Qere  and  Ketib  may  be  due 


INTRODUCTION.  17 

to  errors  found  in  the  text  and  corrected  by  the  Massoretes,  but 
these  cases  are  greatly  in  the  minority,  and  can  be  called  excep- 
tions to  the  rule. 

In  support  of  the  preceding  paragraph  the  following  is  found : 

I  s.  15:  18  nnpnnni  t|^  nps^^i  r^i;i2  ni.T  r^nhz''!) 

T  T       -         -  T  :   -  :  •   :    I    •  •  T  -:         •.■  •  t 

evident  that  the  text  as  it  stands  cannot  be  correct.  But  the 
clause  as  a  whole  is  so  ordinary  and  the  meaning  of  it  so  plain 
from  the  context,  that  the  solution  of  the  problem  is  quite 
apparent.  After  having  read:  "And  Jehovah  sent  thee  on  a 
journey,  and  said.  Go,  and  utterly  destroy  the  sinners  the  Amale- 
kites,  and  fight  against  them  until.  .  .",  then  seeing  the  words 
Dnj<  DnIyS  "ly-  one  evidently  containing  the  Piel  of  the  root 

n^D  "to  finish"  or  "to  consume",  the  other  including  the  suffix 
3rd  pers.  plur.,  one  will  most  naturally  end  the  sentence  either 
"until  they  be  consumed"  or  "until  thou  consume  (or  finish) 
them".  But  it  is  not  only  the  context  that  in  a  general  way 
suggests  what  each  of  the  two  readings  is.  By  carefully  noting 
every  detail  of  the  combination  one  will  arrive  at  the  same  solu- 
tion of  the  problem.     Having  read  the  two  words  DHl^D  IV, 

T  -  - 

every  one  acquainted  with  the  Hebrew  idiom  would  feel  that 
the  sentence  is  finished,  the  sense  is  complete;  and,  since  the 
superfluous  2 ini<  adds  no  new  thought,  he  would  put  a  period  after 
Dn1>'3  IV-  Perhaps  he  would  recall  passages  such  as  I  Kings 
22:  11;  Ps.  1«:  38.    And  yet  there  is  Or\k<^  written  in  the  text 

T 

but  not  accounted  for  in  his  first  translation.  Calling  to  mind 
such  Hebrew  constructions  as  DH^  ^Hl'^^S  "117  in  Jer.  9:  15  and 
49:  37,    he    would    know    that    the    reading    Qp^  Tipl'^S  lU 

would  be  suitable  here,  just  as  well  as  anyone  somewhat  versed 
in  English  would  know  that  either  "until  they  be  consumed"  or 
"until  thou  consume  them"  would  be  a  suitable  conclusion  to 
the  English  sentence.  The  two  alternate  readings  thus  arrived 
at  we  find  represented  in  the  Versions.  LXX,  Syriac,  and  Targ. 
have  Dn^^  "Pi'p^  "ly,  while  Vulg.  has  □nl'pS  IV -  There  is 
one  more  detail  which  should  not  be  left  unnoticed.    The  reading 


18  INTRODUCTION. 

Dni<  nl'p^  IV  would  be  possible  in  Hebrew,  and  would  make 
sense  here.  But  the  suffix  □_  of  Dni^^  serves  the  double 
purpose  of  designating  the  object  of  the  inf.  pll^'D  in  the  one 
reading,  and  in  the  other,  where  we  retain  QcX  as  the  object, 
to  suggest  that  another  suffix  was  added  to  the  inf.  pll^^   as 

subject  (cf.  rule  4,  p.  21).  That  no  other  suffix  would  do  as 
subject  except  that  of  2nd  pers.  sing,  is  plain  from  the  context. 
If  it  had  been  intended  to  combine  the  two  readings  DHl/D  IV 
and  nni^  DlyD  "ly,  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that  the  combina- 
tion would  have  been  ODk^  r\)y3  ^V  (similar  cases  will  be 
seen  in  the  sequel),  and  probably  with  a  Qere,  since  the  con- 
sonants alone,  if  this  were  the  text,  would  not  clearly  indicate 
what  two  readings  were  combined. 

IS.  15: 9  ^Dnnn  r\D^  d^:i  ni-n^:  n^^br^n  ^n  "but 

•v:  V  T  ••  t:        t  :    •   :         t      t  :  -         t  : 

everything  that  was  vile  and  refuse,  that  they  destroyed  utter- 
ly", R.  V.  One  of  the  difficulties  in  the  text  here  is  the  word 
niDDX  which  has  been  pronounced  "a  grammatical  monstrum, 

T :   •     : 

originating  evidently  in  the  blunder  of  a  scribe"  (Driver,  ad  loc.) . 
Explanations  have  also  been  offered  to  show  how  the  scribe  by 
mistake  began  the  word  DQ^  first,  then  noticing  his  mistake 

simply  added  m^  with  ni^t^J  as  the  result.-    The  probability 

T  :    •  : 

is,  however,  that  the  scribe  intentionally  wrote  this  word  exactly 
as  it  stands,  intending  thereby  to  combine  the  Niph.  participle 
ni^X  from  n]3  "to  despise",  and  the  adjective  n]t2^  from  Hl^ 

T  :    •  T  T  ■.•  T  T  T 

"to  suck  out",  "to  exhaust"  (cf.  Deut.  32 :  24   '2V^  ^ ID  "wasted 

with  hunger").  There  was  no  other  way  of  combining  the  two 
except  to  put  the  two  radicals  Q  and  ^  side  by  side  in  the  word ; 
and  as  nothing  else  could  be  made  of  it,  it  was  evidently  expected 
that  the  word  would  be  correctly  understood,  even  without  a 
Qere.    The  word  has  generally  been  read    niDJ»  which  therefore 

T  :  • 

"  It  is  now  generally  recognized  that  in  place  of  (Tir^S?    DP^l  ^'^  should 
read    HD^^D:!!.  t  't: 


INTRODUCTION.  19 

needs  no  further  comment.     The  sense  of  HT^,  the  alternative 

TT 

reading,  is  most  excellently  suited  to  the  context.  'The  best  of 
the  sheep,  and  of  the  oxen,  and  of  the  fatlings,  and  the  lambs, 
and  all  that  was  good"  has  just  been  spoken  of,  and  the  opposite 
is  now  mentioned.  What  more  appropriate  word  could  be  used 
in  this  description  than  ^112  "emaciated"? 

TT 

These  two  examples,  then,  to  which  a  great  many  others  could 
be  added  from  those  discussed  in  the  following,  show  that  the 
very  same  thing  has  taken  place  here  as  in  nearly  all  the  pas- 
sages marked  with  a  Qere,  namely:  two  readings  have  been 
combined.  The  only  difference  is  this,  that  in  these  cases  no 
marginal  note  was  considered  necessary,  because  the  text  itself 
made  the  alternative  readings  sufficiently  clear. 

2.    Cases  where  two  different  traditions  are  indicated 

BY  the  use  of  different  WORDS  OR  CONSTRUCTIONS  IN  CLOSE 
proximity,  while  ORDINARILY  IDENTICAL  WORDS  OR  CONSTRUC- 
TIONS WOULD  BE  EXPECTED. 

There  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  a  scribe  would  try  to 
avoid  marginal  notes  as  far  as  possible  (cf.  Ochlah  W'ochlah, 
p.  VII,  3).  If  he  could  make  some  kind  of  intelligible  combina- 
tion without  resorting  to  the  margin,  he  would.  For  instance, 
it  is  well  known    that  the  prepositions  ^^   and    ^^7  are  very 

often  interchanged,  as  it  would  seem,  without  any  difference  in 
meaning.  In  the  Books  of  Samuel  we  have  numerous  instances 
of  ^^  being  used  where  we  should  naturally  expect  '^y,  and 
vice  versa.  The  following  are  worthy  of  note:  I  S.  14:  10  !)7y 
l^i^y,  and  14:  12  1^''^^^  )bV-  In  the  first  of  these  two  in- 
stances some  20  MSS.  read  ^^b^  )bv  Just  as  in  14:  12.  Our 
text  records  two  readings  by  retaining  t'y  in  one  place  and  "^^^ 
in  the  other  in  the  very  same  context.     I  S.  25 :  17   nn^D  "^3 

1n^3   b^  b]J^   irinX   b^  n^J^n.     Here,  too,  b^  and  b]:  are 

T        -  :  ••      -:         V         T  TT 

used  in  the  same  sense  and  almost  in  the  same  breath.  I  S.  27 : 
10  contains  a  similar  case.  But  the  most  striking  case  of  the 
interchange  of  b^  and  bv    ^^  found  in  II  S.  2 :  9,  where  we 


20  INTRODUCTION. 

have  first  ^^  three  times  and  then  'py  three  times  in  the  same 

sentence.  The  case  is  equalled  only  in  I  S.  9:  4,  where  six 
verb  forms  having  the  same  subject  are  divided  equally  be- 
tween the  sing,  and  the  plur.  (cf.  note  on  this  passage) .  There 
was  ample  opportunity  in  sentences  like  these  cited,  where  the 
same  preposition  is  expected  two  or  more  times,  for  the  scribe 
to  indicate  that  one  authority  had  ^^  uniformly,  and  another 
7^,  without  resorting  to  a  marginal  note.  Only  once  in  the 
two  books  under  consideration  are  these  prepositions  combined 
into  one,  with  the  consonants  of   7^    and  the  vowel  of    '^'^ 

Naturally,  we  find  here  a  Qere,  for  the  consonant  text  alone 
cannot  record  both  readings.  But  it  is  important  to  note  in 
this  passage,  that  there  was  no  opportunity  to  put  both  prepo- 
sitions into  the  text  except  in  this  way.  There  is  only  one  word 
in  the  whole  verse  which  could  possibly  be  governed  by  either 
"p^  or   7^  in  this  connection.     True,  the  next  verse  contains 

alternately  the  two  prepositions,  but  the  idiom  there  is  different, 
and  would  for  that  reason  not  suggest  the  two  readings  for  this 
verse.  Here  it  is  ^y  ^^'"^  or  DH '/H  b^,  in  the  following  verse 
bv  D^"^  or  2C^'1?2n  b^-    How  else  then  could  the  double  tra- 

-  -  T  T  -  ••• 

dition  have  been  preserved  in  this  verse,  except  by  a  marginal 
note  ?  In  this  connection  compare  also  the  combinations  of  num- 
ber in  I  S.  30 :  22  and  in  II  S.  21 :  4,  which  passages  are  treated 
in  the  following.  The  first  of  these  two  places  has  no  marginal 
note.  The  combination  must  have  been  thought  to  be  sufficiently 
obvious  without  it. 

3.  Cases  where  two  different  readings,  commonly  known 
AS  doublets,  have  been  incorporated  in  full  into  the  text. 

In  certain  instances  the  scribe  seems  either  to  have  found  it 
impossible  or  deemed  it  impracticable  to  combine  two  readings 
available,  whether  by  one  method  or  another  of  those  described 
above.  The  solution  he  then  resorted  to  was  simple:  he  incor- 
porated both  readings  in  full  into  the  text — generally  side  by 
side,  though  not  always.    I  S.  19:  20;  24:  7;  II  S.  3:  13;  5:  1; 


INTRODUCTION.  21 

22:  43  are  examples  of  two  readings  put  into  the  text  side  by 
side,  while  I  S.  17:  13  affords  an  instance  of  the  two  readings 
included  in  full,  but  not  side  by  side. 

4.    Cases  where  one  reading  only  is  in  the  text,  but  the 

CONTEXT  is  made  TO  SUGGEST  ANOTHER  IN  ADDITION. 

There  remains  one  more  class  of  alternative  readings  to  be 
mentioned;  those  where,  strictly  speaking,  only  one  reading  is 
found  in  the  text,  but  where  the  context  inevitably  suggests  the 
alternative.  In  such  instances,  it  seems,  the  less  obvious  reading 
was  put  into  the  text,  while  the  easier  construction,  the  one  that 
would  more  readily  be  suggested  by  the  context,  was  left  to  be 
implied  in  the  mind  of  the  reader.  Instances  of  this  kind  we 
have  in  many  places  where  either  nni<  "thou"  or  HDV  "now" 

T  -  T  - 

stands  in  the  text  and  suggests  each  the  other ;  e.  g.  I  S.  28 :  2 ; 
II  S.  7 :  20 ;  18 :  3.  The  two  cases  in  I  S.  31 :  9  of  alternative 
readings  of  this  kind  should  be  especially  noted. 


III.     SOME  GENERAL  RULES  THAT  ARE   FOUND  TO 

HAVE  GUIDED  THE  MASSORETES  IN  THEIR  METHOD 

OF  COMBINING  ALTERNATIVE  READINGS. 

It  is  a  well  known  fact  that  the  Massoretes  had  a  critical 
apparatus  of  their  Holy  Scriptures,  and  this  investigation  may 
in  some  measure  prove  that  they  also  used  this  apparatus  in 
their  transcription  of  the  MSS.  Their  desire  to  include  valu- 
able variant  readings  supplied  by  the  critical  apparatus  prompted 
them  to  make  combinations  such  as  have  been  described  above. 
The  following  are  some  general  rules,  that  seem  to  have  guided 
them  in  doing  this. 

The  one  rule  superseding  all  others  seems  ever  to  have  been 
based  on  the  necessity  of  making  the  combinations  clear.  Fur- 
ther, the  peculiar  circumstances  of  each  combination  made  a 
rule  which,  of  course,  in  that  particular  case  had  to  be  followed. 
In  other  words,  whatever  was  most  convenient  was  the  proper 
method.  These  two  were  ironclad  rules.  Those  that  are  men- 
tioned below  are  more  flexible,  and  would  therefore  have  to 


22  INTRODUCTION. 

yield  to  the  two  mentioned  above  in  every  instance  where  they 
would  conflict.  While  this  must  be  borne  in  mind  distinctly,  the 
following  paragraphs  may  in  some  measure  be  found  instructive. 

1.  Wherever  possible,  marginal  notes  should  be  avoided.  The 
Scriptures  were  considered  holy  by  those  who  had  in  charge  the 
work  of  copying  them.  The  scribes  realized  that  when  a  mar- 
ginal note  was  once  put  into  the  MS.  it  would  stand  there  as  a 
human  element  in  the  midst  of  the  divine,  and  would  very  easily 
lead  to  grave  complications  of  the  text.     See  also  pp.  16,  19. 

2.  The  consonants  of  one  reading  and  the  vowels  of  the  other 
should  be  put  in  the  text,  wherever  such  a  method  would  make 
the  combination  clear.  This  principle  has  been  known  and  ex- 
plained before  by  different  scholars  (cf.  Ginsburg,  Intr.  p,  183  f.) 
and  little  need  be  said  here.  Illustrations  of  it  are  numerous 
in  Samuel  as  well  as  in  any  other  part  of  the  Old  Testament, 
but  the  following  examples,  discussed  in  the  following  pages, 
will  suffice:  I  S.  10:  7;  13 :  8;  15:  16;  20 :  24;  II  S.  3 :  2;  13 :  8: 
14:  22;  23:  8. 

3.  A  consonant  not  common  to  both  readings  should  not  have 
any  vowel,  if  put  into  the  text ;  and  if  it  is  not  put  into  the  text, 
a  space  should  be  left  for  it  there,  and  its  vowel  placed  under 
the  space.  Illustrative  examples  of  this  rule  are  found  in  I  S. 
14:  32;  20:  2;  24:  5;  26:  8;  26:  22;  II  S.  13:  33;  15:  21;  19: 
41;  21:  9. 

4.  The  number  of  consonants  in  a  combination  should,  where 
it  is  possible,  be  made  to  correspond  with  the  reading  which  is 
represented  by  the  consonants,  even  though  the  reading  indi- 
cated by  the  vowels  should  require  more  or  less.  While,  just 
as  the  other  rules,  this  one  can  not  be  said  always  to  be  followed 
strictly  but  is  made  to  yield  to  whatever  is  found  most  con- 
venient and  most  intelligible  in  each  particular  instance,  yet 
there  seem  to  be  some  cases  where  it  plays  an  important  part 
in  solving  the  combination.  Such  are  I  S.  2 :  10 ;  15 :  18 ;  II  S. 
23 :  8\  The  notes  on  these  passages  should  be  compared  in  this 
connection.  Of  especial  interest  is  the  marginal  note  against 
Ti^^Dm    in  I  S.  25:  34.     The  word  in  the  text  has  been  pro- 

:  T  - 

nounced  by  Nestle  a  combination  of  "'^^2^1  and  H^^DI  (ZAW, 


INTRODUCTION.  23 

XIV,  p.  319),  and  this  has  been  accepted  by  many  scholars  (cf. 
Ges.  76'0.     But  the  margin  reads  nj^^m.  which  seems  to  be 

:  T- 

capable  of  no  satisfying  solution,  unless  it  is  understood  as  an 
attempt  to  improve  on  the  combination  found  in  the  text.  What, 
then,  could  have  been  the  objection  to  "'iH^^^ril?  It  was  evidently 
this,  that  ^n^^^m  irould  stand  for  ^^'2D]  and  ^n5<21,  the  1st 

:  T-  •       T-  •       T 

pers.  sing,  of  the  perf.  As  it  is,  the  context  makes  the  misunder- 
standing impossible  but  the  author  of  the  marginal  note  seems 
in  this  case  actually  to  have  corrected  the  combination  already 
found  in  the  text.     In   both  the  readings,   "'^^^Hl  and  pi^D^, 

T-  :       T 

only  one  consonant  as  ending  follows  the  last  radical  of  the  verb, 
5*5;  and  by  having  "^n^^Hl  in  the  text  the  presence  of  both   p 

:  T- 

and  ^  at  the  end  is  misleading.  In  Qere,  vocalized  as  the  impf., 
the  n  holds  the  place  of  "^  of  ^5<3m»  while  it  at  the  same  time 

T- 

is  the  ending  of  the  2nd  fem.  perf.  Of  course,  the  p  at  the 
beginning  had  to  be  there  as  the  representative  of  the  impf. 
The  perf.  is  more  easily  suggested  by  the  present  form  "^H^^^m, 

in  spite  of  the  preformative,  than  the  impf.  could  have  been,  had 
the  preformative  been  lacking. 

The  situation  in  II  S.  23 :  8  is  also  illuminating.  The  two 
readings  combined  there  are  U^Z^^WH  ^'^^"1  and  HZ^'^fn  Z^^l- 
The  text  is  vocalized  as  though  the  word  were   □^CSvuH*  but 

•    r  T  - 

the  final  Q  is  excluded,  in  order  that  the  number  of  consonants 
may    indicate    the    alternative    reading    as     riCvL!<*n    and    not 

,  T        :    - 

□JC''!^2^*~,  as  is  the  case  in  I  Chr.  11:  11;  12:  19  (where  the  Q 
is  put  in). 

IV.     CASES  OF  SPECIAL  IMPORTANCE. 

The  marginal  notes  in  I  S.  25 :  34  and  in  II  S.  3:  25  are  of 
incalculable  value  as  evidence  more  directly  from  the  Masso- 
retes  themselves  of  the  fact  that  they  consciously  and  inten- 
tionally put  seemingly  impossible  forms  into  the  MSS.,  in  order 
thereby  to  preserve  the  different  traditions  found  in  certain 
passages.     I  S.  25 :  34  has  already  been  discussed  above,  and 


24  INTRODUCTION. 

what  has  been  said  there  will  probably  suffice,  except  that  stress 
should  be  laid  upon  this:  if  we  consider  the  form  written  in 
the  text  a  "monstrum"  (as  it  was  once  considered),  that  would 
reflect  unfavorably  upon  the  conscientiousness  or  intelligence  of 
the  Massoretes,  who  had  in  charge  the  copying  and  editing  of 
the  MSS. ;  the  mistake  could,  however,  be  ascribed  to  universal 
human  fallibility ;  but  when  we  also  find  in  what  we  term  their 
"correction"  of  the  erroneous  word  in  the  text  a  form  on  the 
face  of  it  just  as  impossible  grammatically  as  the  form  it  was 
intended  to  correct,  then  we  are  obliged  not  to  utterly  discredit 
the  grammatical  intelligence  of  the  scribes,  but  rather  to  seek 
a  satisfying  explanation  for  the  peculiar  phenomenon.  The  ex- 
planation given  in  the  note  on  I  S.  25 :  34  and  in  the  preceding 
paragraph  seems  to  satisfy  in  every  detail,  and  the  present 
writer  for  that  reason  feels  reasonably  assured  that  it  is  correct. 
The  case  in  II  S.  3 :  25  is  very  similar.  The  text  here  contains 
the  quite  ordinary  expression  Tj^^l^p  Pl^^l  Tj^^y1?2  Pl^  "thy 
going  out  and  thy  coming  in".  The  consonant  text  is  exactly 
as  we  should  expect  it,  and  if  it  were  not  for  the  vocalization 
and  the  margin,  there  would  be  no  problem  to  explain.  But  the 
Qere  is  Tl^^^lQ-  found  only  in  Ez.  43:    11  besides  here,  and 

termed  "abnormal  and  incorrect"  by  Driver  (Notes  on  Sam., 
ad  loc.) .  In  the  Ezekiel  passage  the  margin  is  silent,  in  spite 
of  the  fact  that  the  text  has  this  "abnormal"  and  "incorrect" 
form.  If  we  are  prone  to  discredit  the  scribes,  here  is  an  ex- 
cellent opportunity  to  accuse  them  of  doing  the  wrong  thing  at 
the  wrong  time.  Where  the  text  is  right,  they  seem  to  have 
made  it  incorrect,  and  where  it  needs  correction,  they  have  left 
it  as  it  is.  Both  Driver  and  Konig  (II,  p.  127)  think  that  per- 
haps for  the  sake  of  assonance  the  Qere  has  been  vocalized  as 
it  is.  But  there  is  a  more  plausible  explanation.  The  Qere  here 
and  the  similar  form  in  Ez.  43:  11  T]^53l7^  ni<)  ^^?^i?0  H^^ 
are  intended  to  show  that  some  authorities  had  T|^5^iO  fii'st, 
and  others  T]^^n?p-  The  fact  that  T]^i|lD?p  is  vocalized  as  T]^5!ilD 
was  meant  to  indicate  this.  But  this  theory  is  supported  not 
only  by  the  fact  that  it  sounds  plausible  and  is  brought  forward 
with  a  mass  of  similar  examples;  we  have  also  testimony  from 
the  Versions  that  authorities  did  exist  which  had  the  Avords 


INTRODUCTION.  25 

^^yi^  and  ^n^2  in  reversed  order.  In  the  passage  here  under 
discussion  the  Lagarde  text  of  LXX  has:  Wyv  tto-oSdv  aov  Kal  W/v 
€io86v  o-ov,  representing  the  alternative  reading,  while  the  Syriac 
of  the  Ezekiel  passage  has  the  word-order  of  the  Hebrew  re- 
versed. 


Library  Puhlicati 


Alternative    Readings    in   tlie    First    Book 
of   Samuel. 


CHAPTER  II. 

3.  niSb'I?  I^SnJ  ^^/V  Ketlb  "though  actions  be  not  weighed". 
Qe7'e  nibbr  1J3nJ  1^1  "sind  by  him  actions  are  weighed". 
Either  construction  is  possible,  and  represents  a  separate  reading. 
Greek  favors  Q.  Syriac  has  a  mixture  of  both  readings  perhaps. 
The  context  favors  Q.  The  adoption  of  Ketlb  would  mean  a 
weakening  anti-chmax,  which,  however,  could  be  defended.  At 
any  rate,  Q.  is  the  easier  construction  and  gives  the  expected 

meaning.     This  is  quite  significant;  for  though  ^7  in  the  text 

would  suggest  to  the  reader  17,  the  reverse  is  not  true.     It  is 

possible  that  this  is  the  reason  why  ^7  and  not  17  was  put  in 
the  text, 

10.   nnO    inn^    nin^     Kem  nnO,  Qere  VT'ID  "They 

T      •  :  -  ••        T     :  •  :  t      •  : 

that  strive  with  Jehovah  shall  be  broken  to  pieces"  or  "he  that 
striveth".  Both  readings  are  equally  well  suited  to  the  meaning 
of  the  context,  though,  in  case  K.  be  adopted,  the  previous  word 
would  have  to  be  made  to  correspond  with  the  sing,  l^^^ip. 

Greek  favors  the  sing.,  and  Syriac  the  plural.  But  the  choice 
here  .of  Q.  or  K.  depends  largely  on  the  interpretation  of  the  fol- 
lowing word,  which  see. 

10.  QT;^^  D^ni^'B  )bV-  Ketlb  n':?!;-  Qere  )^b]^.  Ketib  trans- 
lated:  "He  ascended  in  the  heavens  thundering"  (cf.  Greek). 
Qere:  "Against  him  will  he  thunder  in  heaven".     17^   is  written 

T  T 

thus  only  here  and  in  II  S.  20 :  8,  which  see.  This  unusual  form 
therefore  cautions  the  reader  that  another  word  of  similar  sound 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.         27 

and  with  the  same  number  of  letters  should  be  substituted  in 
the  Ketlh.  The  only  word  that  fulfils  this  condition  and  fits  the 
context  is  n'^y.     It  is  quite  interesting  to  note  that  after  ex- 

T  T 

eluding  from  the  Greek  of  this  verse  the  part  that  has  crept  in 
from  Jer.  9 :  23,  24,  we  have  left  quite  a  faithful  representation 
of  the  Ketih  throughout  the  verse,  even  including  the  sing.  i2*"ip 

(see  preceding  note) .  It  is  also  to  be  noted  that  Syriac  repre- 
sents Q.  throughout  the  verse,  having  even  3rd  pers.  plur.  suff. 
after  the  preposition  ';?y.  Our  text  could  not  very  well  have 
preserved  that. feature  too,  since  □"''^y  would  not  have  lent 
itself  to  combination  with  roV-  But  of  course  in  the  mind  of 
the  reader  who  adopts  V^n^'    i^V  stands  for  □rp':?^.     There 

T      •  :  T  T  V    — : 

are  then,  strictly  speaking,  three  different  readings  combined  in 
this  verse,  and  all  are  possible  and  suitable  in  the  context;  the 
choice  is  with  the  reader.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  the  emen- 
dations now  generally  adopted  here  (see  the  comms.)  are  de- 
sirable. 

16.  (Hn  nny  ^3  lb  "l^^^l-  Ketlh  "and  he  would  say  to  him: 
Thou  Shalt  give".  Qere  jnn  nn^  :?  ^  "IDiJl  "and  he  would 
say,  Nay,  but  thou  shalt  give".  Either  reading  is  perfectly  clear, 
though  perhaps  Q.  is  a  little  more  vivid. 

CHAPTER  IV. 

13.  r\^^^  rrn^  "]^  ^P^n  by  ^c;*^  ^^V.  "^^^  ^^^^  sitting  upon 

his  seat  by  the  wayside  watching",  R.  V.     Ketlh  TI^  Qere  T. 

The  Ketlh  makes  no  sense,  and  has  generally  been  considered  a 
clerical  error.  It  is  very  probable,  howeyer,  that  the  lengthening 
of  "I  to  ■]  in  this  word  was  intended  to  serve  a  definite  purpose, 

namely  to  warn  the  reader  to  stricter  attention  to  the  details  of 
the  text,  so  that  he  might  see  that  the  consonants  n^y^^  may  be 

read  either  HSlaLD  ''watching"  or  mSIJl}  "Mispah".     Thus  two 

•.•  -  r  T  :  • 

readings  are  possible  here  by  changing  the  pointing:  one,  "Eli 
was  sitting  upon  his  seat  by  the  wayside  (read  Timlin)  watch- 


28        ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

ing" ;  the  other,  "Eli  was  sitting  upon  his  seat  by  the  side  of  the 
road  to  Mizpah".=^     The  "]   of  the  Ketib  is  a  part  of  neither  of 

these  two  readings,  but  is  put  in  the  text  as  a  "Nota  bene !"  or 
"Obs. !"  Several  other  passages  can  be  cited  where  something 
out  of  the  ordinary  in  the  text  has  a  function  similar  to  that 
of  the  K.  in  this  verse.  See  for  instance  Jud.  16 :  5,  where  the 
pathah  in  jH^  is  plainly  out  of  place,  jp^  or  13 p J  is  what  we 
should  expect.  But  if  either  of  these  two  forms  had  been  written 
in  the  text,  the  other  would  not  have  suggested  itself.  As  it  now 
is,  both  of  them  will  naturally  come  into  the  mind  of  the  reader. 
Note  also  the  small  "  in  Gen.  2 :  4,  the  suspended  ^  in  Jud.  18 : 
30,  and  the  large  and  the  small  Pj  in  Dan.  6 :  20,  in  all  of  which 
places  the  extraordinary  appearance  of  the  text  is  intended  to 
direct  the  reader's  attention  to  two  possible  readings. 

18.  ivz'n  ni  n^2  n^^yi^  ^sp^n  bvD  Vs^i  "he  feii  from 

off  his  seat  backward  by  the  side  of  the  gate",  R.  V.  In  this 
translation  1i^3  is  not  represented.     Driver  (ad  loc.)  suggests, 

that  we  should  probably  read  Ip^'ij  1^2  "through  (an  opening 

in)  the  gate".  The  text  as  it  stands  cannot  be  translated  and 
give  satisfactory  sense.  But  the  two  translations,  the  one  sug- 
gested by  Driver  and  that  of  the  Revised  Version,  are  both  pos- 
sible and  satisfactory,  if  we  in  the  case  of  the  one  delete  "I^, 

and  in  the  other  "1^2.     The  fact  that  both  these  translations 

have  offered  themselves  to  different  readers  shows  how  effective 
was  the  method  used  in  combining  the  two  readings  iy^*n  "11^3 
and  "iPkS'n  ly  In  the  latter  reading  li  is  construed  as  ace. 
of  place. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

4.  □r'':inD^1  Ub^b  Dn^  HD^ID  ^3  "for  one  plague  was  on 
them  all,  and  on  your  lords",  R.  V.  margin.  Evidently,  here  is 
a  mixture  of  2nd  and  3rd  person.  Greek  and  Syriac  have  2nd 
person  uniformly.    Thus  was  perhaps  the  most  common  reading. 


:^  The  Heb.  text  rendered  by  LXX  had  suffered  contamination  from  vs.  18. 


ALTERNATR^  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.         23 

But  with  this  reading  has  been  combined  one  which  had  3rd 
person  throughout.  Both  these  constructions  are  possible.  In 
one  case,  the  clause  is  included  in  the  preceding  quotation,  in 
the  other,  it  is  to  be  taken  as  an  explanation  by  the  narrator. 
Note,  that  a  marginal  Qere  was  unnecessary  here,  since  ther(; 
were  two  words  that  required  suffixes.  The  one  could  be  supplied 
with  a  2nd  pers.  suffix,  and  the  other  with  a  3rd  pers.  suffix. 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

19.  ^yh'^  ^^■^"]  Tjbp  Dv^  '?  s^'-)  n::^^l  "And  they  said,  Nay, 
but  we  will  have  a  king  over  us",  R.  V.  This  passage  recalls 
the  one  in  2:  16,  where,  after  the  verb  1^^,  *2  y)  was  found 
in  the  text,  while  the  margin  substituted  ^^S.  The  possibility 
suggests  itself  at  once  of  reading  17  instead  of  '^^,  and  the 
dagesh  in  the  5<>»  is  the  key  to  the  situation.  For,  reading  the 
consonants  as  they  stand,  one  would  naturally  make  a  short  stop 

after  !l"ip^^l,  and  let  i^'^  begin  the  quotation;  and  that  is  one 
acceptable  reading.  But  the  dagesh  indicates  that  ^'p  should  be 
closely  connected  with  Tip^^l  and  be  pronounced  something  like 
i'p"^;^^^!.    Of  course  in  this  case  the  ^'p  must  be  changed  into 

i'p,* since  this  alone  of  the  two  would  be  capable  of  such  close 
connection  with  1*110^^1.     We  have  thus,  by  the  pointing  of  the 

Massoretes,  arrived  at  an  alternative  reading,  C^>  '-  1  /  T^^^^■  1 
"and  they  said  to  him,  But,  etc.",.  which  is  equally  acceptable, 
as  regards  both  construction  and  meaning.  The  Greek  too  com- 
bines, but  less  cleverly :  koI  cl-n-av  alrw  Oixt,  aXX  ^  (SaaLkevs,  etc. 
Syriac  has:  ii]  U^a,  q  =^.1^1=.     Cf.  10:  19  and  12:  12. 

For  similar  cases  of  dagesh  in  ^5^,  cf.  Gen.  19 :  2  and  Hab.  2 :  6. 

CHAPTER  IX. 

1.  ^rp^  u'^^5  D  "the  son  of  a  Benjamite".  ^J^:^";  'C'^i^  is 
found  elsewhere,  II  S.  20:  1;  Est.  2:  5,  but  the  combination 
^yi^"^  Z'^^  p    occurs  nowhere  else,  and  is  here  highly  improb 


30        ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

able.  If  the  father  of  Aphiah  was  not  known  by  name  (Driver, 
ad  loc),  it  is  not  likely  that  an  attempt  would  be  made  to  con- 
tinue the  genealogy  by  stating  that  Aphiah  was  ''the  son  of  a 
Benjamite".  The  genealogy  would  be  more  likely  to  end  with 
a  definite  statement  as  to  the  tribal  connection  of  the  man  last 
named.  Either  "i^^^^  n  or  ^^P^  ^'^^  is  what  we  would  expect 
here..  And  the  fact  that  Lucian's  Recension  of  the  Greek  and' 
the  Syriac  express  only  ''^^p^  D'^5<  makes  it  reasonably  certain 
that  we  have  here  two  readings,  "'rp''  ]2  and  ^^^P^  Z^^^,  both 
included  in  the  Hebrew  text. 

3.  D^*iy.3n(0  "in^^  "one  of  the  servants".  While  the  construct 
state  before  a  preposition  in  Hebrew  seems  to  be  of  quite  fre- 
quent occurrence  (Ges.  130^),  it  may  be  well  to  note  it  here 
because  of  a  similar  case  in  H  S.  10:  9,  where  the  Massoretes 
have  made  a  marginal  note  directing  the  reader  to  delete  the 
preposition.  It  is  perhaps  hard  to  determine  whether  this. case 
is  due  to  the  effort  of  the  scribe  who  desired  to  combine  the  two 
readings,  D^"iy.3n  in^  and  D^II^^UnC  ITl^,  or  whether  our 
present  text  is  original. 

4.  1^^1JD"i:in"n3U^V'-\Nl»^Q"lb:7^V"lbrV    six  verbs,  all 

T  T  -: —  : T  T  -: —  -: — 

with  one  and  the  same  subject,  though  three  are  in  the  sing,  and 
three  in  the  plur.  They  evidently  represent  two  different  tradi- 
tions; one  with  the  sing,  throughout,  the  verbs  then  referring 
to  Saul  alone  as  the  subject,  without  taking  account  of  the 
servant  with  him;  the  other  with  the  plur.  throughout,  with 
Saul  and  his  servant  as  the  plur.  subject.  Note  that  the  verbs 
are  divided  equally  between  the  sing,  and  the  plur.,  seemingly 
without  preference  expressed  for  one  reading  or  the  other.  (Cf, 
II  S.  2:  9,  where  ^$<  and  bv  are  distributed  in  the  same  way.) 
The  Greek  has  here  the  plur.  uniformly,  while  the  Syriac  renders 
first  two  verbs  in  the  sing.,  then  one  in  the  plur.,  then  two  in  the 
sing.,  then  one  in  the  plur.  The  combination  here  becomes  suf- 
ficiently evident  to  the  reader  without  any  marginal  note. 

24.  n^^rni  piWn  n^  n^COn  Dn^l  "And  the  cook  took  up 
the  thigh,  and  that  which  was  upon  it",  R.  V.    Though  such  a 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.         31 

translation  makes  possible  sense,  it  does  not  suit  this  context. 
Driver  (ad  loc.)  doubts  strongly  that  this  punctuation  represents 
a  genuine  tradition,  and  adds:  "The  usage  here  (of  Ti  as  a 
relative  with  the  prep.  ^^)  is  exceptional,  and  entirely  unsup- 
ported by  precedent  or  parallel."  Under  the  circumstances  it 
can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  Geiger  (Urschrift,  p.  380)  is  right 
in  reading  rp^^^nl  "and  the  fat  tail".    The  context  is  particu- 

t:    -  T  : 

larly  well  suited  by  this  reading,  the  allusion  in  the  verse  being 
"to  certain  choice  pieces  reserved  specially  for  those  honored 
with  a  place  D^i<l"lpn  C'^<"13"  (Driver,  ad  loc).  Only  one 
change  in  the  consonants  of  the  text  is  required,  namely  ^5 
substituted  for  ^.  But  how  account  for  the  y?  The  vowels, 
moreover,  as  well  as  the  substituted  consonant,  suggest  a  verb 
with  the  3rd  fem.  sing.  sufRx,  and  the  context  determines  the 
form:  n'^y^l.  This  would  mean  "and  he  brought  it  up",  assum- 
ing that  the  cook  advanced  to  the  place  where  the  most  honored 
guests  were  sitting,  from  the  ''lower"  end  of  the  "guest-chamber" 
where  the  food  was  being  prepared.  This  second  (perfectly 
plausible)  reading  was  combined  with  the  other.     □I'^l  can  in 

VT- 

either  case  very  well  be  translated  .as  above,  "and  the  cook  took 
top",  i.  e.  the  thigh  from  where  it  had  been  lying. 

CHAPTER  X. 

19.    ^Tbv   D^tr\   Thr2  ^3    )b    n^^m    "And  ye  have  said 
unto  him,  (But)  set  a  king  over  us".  ^^  may  be  regarded  here  as 

only  the  sign  of  a  direct  quotation  following.  But  the  fact  that 
•'3  so  often  is  used  after  the  negative,  in  the  sense  "but",  sug- 
gests to  the  reader  the  possibility  of  reading  ^^';)  instead  of  1^, 
thus  translating  the  sentence:  "And  ye  have  said.  Nay,  but  set 
a  king  over  us".  So  the  Greek,  Syriac  and  Latin  versions !  Of. 
8:  19  and  12:  12;  also  on  28:  2. 


32        ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

CHAPTER  XII. 

12.  ir^U  TJbp^.  T]^p  ^3  s^b  ^b  npv^ni  "And  ye  said  unto 
me,  Nay,  but  a  king  shall  reign  over  us".  The  interesting  feature 
of  this  passage  is  that  it  combines,  or  rather  includes  in  full,  the 
two^  different  readings  found  in  8:  19  and  10:  19.  Greek  B  and 
Syriac  exclude  "''7.    Greek  L  agrees  with  the  Hebrew. 

13.  uph^p  ^crA^  Dnnns  ni^'^?  '^br;^r\  "The  king  whom 

ye  have  chosen,  whom  ye  have  asked  for".  This  is  a  doublet; 
two  different  readings,  both  included  in  full  in  the  Hebrew. 
Greek  B  lacks  Qri/i^tp'  "It^^^-  Greek  L  and  Syriac  support  the 
Hebrew.  Either  of  the  clauses  would  render  the  sense  complete. 
'v5^Il^  is  used  of  the  request  for  a  king  in  8:  10.  Nevertheless 
Dn7^^'  I^lJ^  appears  here  to  be  superfluous,  and  is  probably 
to  be  omitted  with  LXX."    (Driver,  ad  loc.) . 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

heart:  turn  thee",  R.  V.  The  sense  thus  rendered  is  not  very 
suitable,  especially  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  usual  force  of 
mCO^  is  "incline",  which  is  undesirable  if  the  rest  of  the  text  is 

TT 

kept  as  it  stands  (see  Driver,  ad  loc).  Greek  B  has:  iiot'et  -n-av  o 
iav  Tj  KapSta  aov  eKKXivrj,  and  L  has  the  same,  except  that  it  sub- 
stitutes OtXrjdrf  for  f-KKXiVYj^  and  adds  at  the  end  of  the  verse: 
IkkXivov  o-eavroV.     These   two    authorities,    therefore,    point   to    a 

reading:  "h  HCO^  ^?^'^  ^P^.  ^2  n^y.  "do  all  unto  which  thy 
heart  inclines".  This  construction  is  plausible  here,  and  the 
idiom  has  parallels:  Jud.  9:3;  Ps.  119:  36,  112.  But  the  prep. 
3  before  Tj^^r'  suggests  another  expression,  equally  idiomatic 
and  suitable:  TjDD'p?  ^^%^  b"^  nt^V  "do  all  that  is  in  thy 
heart".  Cf .  Ex.  35 :  34 ;  Ezr."  7 :  27.  The  Syriac  has  this  reading 
represented  twice  in  the  verse.  It  seems  therefore  reasonably 
certain  that  our  text  combines  the  two  readings.    Why  1^  should 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.         33 

have  been  changed  into  Tp  is  perhaps  hard  to  say,  but  it  may 
be  supposed  that  the  change  v^as  due  to  some  scribe's  failure  to 
understand  that  the  text  contained  two  readings. 

10  and  12.  ^ybv  )^V  and  "i:^':5^5  t>V  "Come  up  to  us". 
The  use  of  7^;  and  ':?^!|  in  the  very  same  expression  and  in 
such  close  proximity  is  probably  an  attempt  to  show  that  some 
MSS.  had  ^y  in  both  cases  and  some  ^^^.  See  introduction,  p.  19, 
andcf.  25:  17;  27 :  10;  II  S.  2:  9. 

32.     bbiS'"  b^  Drn  tV^)-    Ketib  bbd  DVn  t'iJ^I  "And  the 

TT-  V  TT  —  TT  TT 

people  made  spoil".  Qere  ^^^'n  ?^  Oyn  [2^1  ''And  the  peo- 
ple flew  upon  the  spoil".  Q.  is  plausible  and  very  descriptive, 
and  deserves  preference  rather  than  K.  as  the  original  reading. 
However,  K.  also  is  idiomatic  and  has  support  in  passages  like 
Gen.  12:  15;  31:  1;  Jer.  17:  11;  I  Kings  1:5;  Deut.  8:  17,  18. 
It  is  to  be  noted  that  a  part  of  the  one  construction  and  a  part 
of  the  other  were  admitted  into  the  text.  The  incongruity  of  the 
preposition  b^  following  nt^'y  was  considered  suflncient  indica- 

T    T 

tion  to  the  reader  that  it  must  be  dropped  in  case  K.  is  adopted ; 
while  the  presence  of  the  preposition  b^  and  the  similar  phrase 
bbWn  b^  C2I^m  in  l^  :  19  could  be  counted  on  to  suggest  the  Q. 
It  is  probable,  however,  that  Z*Vl]  originally  came  into  the  text 
as  an  error  of  transcription  and  that  the  sequel  was  changed  to 
make  the  context  grammatically  consistent.  This  is  a  very  in- 
teresting case. 

CHAPTER  XV. 

1.  ^^5*1^'^  bv  i^y  bv  "^hi^h  "To  (be)  king  over  his  people, 
over  Israel".  B  has  only  eVi  'hrpar'iX,  and  L  only  ^tti  tov  Aaov  avrov 
Syriac  has  both  phrases  but  in  reversed  order.  We  have  here 
two  different  readings,  both  included  in  full  in  the  Hebrew  text. 

1.  nirr  ^*121  b)pb  Vi^Z^  "Hearken  unto  the  voice  of  the 
words  of  Jehovah".    B  and  Vulgate  have  only  nln"]    /Ip/   Vl2t/ 


34        ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

represented.  L  and  Syriac  correspond  to  the  Hebrew.  It  may 
be  that  here  too  the  text  combines  two  different  readings  in  full 

n|n^  b)pb  i:Dp  and  nin^  n.;ii  vt^z'- 

9.     Ci2y]  ni'2'02    ''Vile  and  refuse",  R.  V.     nn^23  combines 

"  T :        T  :    •  :  t  :    •  : 

the  Niph.  participle  of   HD    and  an  adjectival  form  of   Til^D; 

TT  TT 

ni^J  "despised"  or  "vile"  and  ,1];^  "sucked  out"  or  "wasted 
with  hunger",  "emaciated".  Cf.  3i;"l  ^1^:,  Deut.  32:  24.  The 
sense  thus  gotten  from   n];^   is  especially  suited  to  the  context, 

TT 

the  contrast  here  being  between  "the  best  of  the  sheep,  and  of 
the  oxen,  and  of  the  fatlings,  and  the  lambs,  and  all  that  was 
good"  on  the  one  hand,  and  that  which  was  lean  and  poor  on  the 
other.    See  further  the  Introduction,  p.  18. 
18.     nni^  DPl^D  "ly    "Untll  they  be  consumed",  R.  V.     The 

exact  translation  of  the  present  text  would  be  "until  they  con- 
sume them",  which  makes  no  sense  here.  B,  L,  and  Syriac  have 
□riN  '^ni>'5  IV,  whlle  Vulgate  renders  Ur\)b3  "ip.  Our 
present  Hebrew  text  is  a  combination  of  these  two  readings. 
With  Dni^  ^n1^5  IV  cf.  Jer.  9:  15;  49:  37,  and  for  Dnl^S  IV 
cf.  I  Kings  22 :  11 ;  Ps.  18 :  38.    See  the  Introduction,  p.^17. 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

16.  lyp  yT  Z^^^  "A  man  who  is  a  skillful  player  on  the 
harp",  R.  V.  In  no  other  instance  is  ^"I'l  followed  by  another 
participle  denoting  that  in  which  one  is  skillful.  The  regular 
construction  is  y"I"'  followed  by  inf.  But  the  piel  ptc.  of  the 
verb  designating  the  profession  is  often  used  of  one  who 
habitually  qr  skillfully  is  engaged  in  that  profession.  The  two 
readings  J3^p    \^^^  "a  player"  and  ]y  y"l'"i   ^'^^^  "one  skillful 

in  playing"  are  both  suitable  here,  and  the  Hebrew  is  a  combina- 
tion of  the  two.  Cf.  V.  18.  LXX  have  avSpa  elSora  i/^aAAetv,  the 
second  of  these  two  readings. 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.         35 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

13.  b'i^'c;  nnvS  )2bn  Q^^i:"  ^*l:*^  \;2  nc'^v*  irbn  "And 

the  three  eldest  sons  of  Jesse  had  gone  after  Saul  (to  the  battle) ", 
R.  V.  One  of  the  two  verbs  in  the  Hebrew  is  superfluous  (see 
Driver,  ad  loc.) .  A  and  L  have  Kal  iTropevdqa-av  at  the  beginning 
of  the  verse,  A  then  repeating  iiropevdrjaav  in  the  place  of  1^*^". 
Syriac  has  only  the  first  verb.  It  is  quite  plain  that  two  readings 
have  here  been  combined.  In  one  of  them  the  verb  was  ir'p^l, 
in  the  other  l^Sl.    The  rest  of  the  sentence  was  in  both  cases 

the  same.  If  we  keep  the  first  verb  and  delete  the  second,  we 
have  a  regular  consecutive  clause,  carrying  forward  a  step  the 
action  of  the  main  story.  Granting  the  second  verb  its  place  in 
preference  to  the  first  would  render  this  clause  a  link  in  the 
chain  of  circumstantial  clauses  which  precede  and  follow  it.  It 
is  well  to  note  here  that  each  verb  is  exactly  in  its  correct  place 
in  the  sentence,  wherefore  no  attempt  could  be  made  to  actually 
combine  the  words,  as  in  other  places  a  perf.  and  an  impf.  quite 
often  are  combined.  Cf.  Deut.  33:  16;  Job  22:  21.  Whatever 
else  of  the  two  words  could  have  been  combined,  their  positions 
could  not. 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 

1.  )^^:i^  jnjirp  i^ns^n  in  •i:*e::2  niu'p:  jn^irr  u*>:i 

:  -  :      I  T  T       :      ••  t  ■.■::■-      •  t         v  v  :  t  :   I:  •     I  r  t        :        v  v  : 

"And  the  soul  of  Jonathan  was  knit  with  the  soul  of  David,  and 
Jonathan  loved  him  as  his  own  soul",  R.  V.  The  Ketib  has  been 
pointed   nn^^^l  by  Kittel  and  Driver  (ad  loc),  and  in  support 

of  this  form  of  the  sufiix  the  latter  cites  Hos.  8 :  3  iDTl^ ;  Ps. 
35:  8  n^Sn;  Jer.  23:  6  )^^p^ ;  Eccl.  4:  12   IPpH^  Josh.  2:  4 

iJDym  •  It  is  interesting  to  note,  however,  that  all  these  pas- 
sages, with  the  exception  perhaps  of  Ps.  35 :  8,  bear  the  marks 
of  combined  readings.  In  Hos.  8:  3  i^Tl"'  could  very  well  be 
pointed  as  a  plur.  IC'1'1''  (so  the  Greek),  since  its  subject  2^1^ 
in  sense  is  plur.    I^^lp'^    in  Jer.  23:  6  is  considered  by  Ges.  a 


36        ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

"forma  mixta"  (74«),  i.  e.  it  could  also  be  considered  a  plural  (so 
the  Syriac)  with  an  indefinite  subject.    In  Eccl.  4 :  12  iCpP^  D5<1 

n^J  MDT  D^r^*n  "in^^n,  generally  translated  "And  if  a  man 
prevail  against  him  that  is  alone,  two  shall  withstand  him",  the 
uncertainty  of  the  reading  is  obvious,  for  the  suffix  is  useless ; 
neither  Grk.  nor  Syr.  had  it  in  their  text,  but  took  as  the  subject 
of  the  verb  int<n>  which  naturally  means  "the  one"  of  the  two 
companions,  as  in  vss.  9  f.  The  text  in  Josh.  2 :  4  is  known  to 
be  corrupt  (Driver,  Notes  on  Samuel,  I,  18:  1),  but  the  word 
found  in  the  Hebrew  seems  to  be  clearly  a  combination  of  QjSVi^^ 
"and  she  hid  them"  and  ?1J£^^1^  "and  they  hid"  (intr.) .  To  this 
evidence  should  be  added  ]iZ']l  in  21 :  14  and  l^;^]  in  II  S.  14 : 
6,  on  which  see  notes. 

A  form  i^nj^^l  is  therefore  extremely  unlikely  here,  in  any 
text.  The  plur.  of  the  imperf.  is  not  to  be  thought  of,  and  the 
perf.  with  suffix  would  be  out  of  place.  The  imperf.  sing,  tvithout 
suffix,  however,  would  be  most  natural  here;  and  this,  ^ij^^^l, 

was  probably  one  of  the  two  readings,  jn^in''  being  taken  as  the 

object.  What  M.T.  gives  us  is4he  only  natural  combination  of 
this  latter  form  and  the  Qere. 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

20.  On^/y  DlJJl  "l?py  'pi^lD^'T  "And  Samuel  standing  as 
one  appointed  over  them".  Driver.  "Both  ptcpp.  are  represented 
in  LXX,  but  the  combination  is  peculiar  and  suspicious"  (Driver, 
ad  loc.)  Syriac  has  only  >cU  .  This  is  probably  another  instance 
of  two  readings  preserved  in  full  in  the  text.  Either  one  of  the 
participles  would  be  sufficient  for  the  meaning. 

CHAPTER  XX. 


2.    nni  ^2^^  ni^'i;°  i^.  Kem  nt^yib  "if  my  father  had  done 

T    T  •    T  V    -:-  T    T 

anything",  etc.    (the  conclusion  is  left  out,  or  rather  implied). 
Qere  Tlt^y^   ^^^  "My  father  doeth  nothing"  etc.     Either  con- 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.         37 

struction  is  idiomatic  and  plausible.  For  analogy  to  K.  cf.  Gen. 
50 :  15,  where  yp  introduces  a  conditional  clause  without  an 
apodosis. 

24.  DH^n  bv  "H/'i^"  ^w'^l  "The  king  sat  him  down  to  eat 
food",  R.  V.    Ketib   bV;  Qere  b^.      ^^  and  ^'^  are  very  often 

interchanged,  seemingly  with  the  same  meaning.  See  the  note 
on  14:  10  and  12. 

25.  -i^jpn  3i^iD  b^ "  nc^iD  b'j  "^^r^n  ^p':}_  "And  the  king 

sat  upon  his  seat  (as  at  other  times),  even  upon  the  seat  by  the 
wall".     7^  and  '^'^  are  both  preserved  in  the  text,  as  indication 

of  two  traditions.  Cf.  preceding  note,  where  both  are  combined 
in  one  word,  and  have  a  marginal  note. 

30.  ^t^^  |nb  nnsv;  nnb  ^2  \'nyi;^  ^bn  "do  not  i  know 

that  thou   hast  chosen  the  son  of  Jesse?"  R.  V.     LXX  have 

ii.iroxo%  for  Hebrew  "1(13,    i-    e.    they    read    ^l^H-     Syriac  has 
..  ..  ^ 

,.^-»]?  aii-:ii=  hj\]  |_s.^9.  After  *in3  in  the  Hebrew  we  should  cer- 
tainly expect  3,  for  there  is  no  instance  of  "IHS  being  construed 
with  "p.  The  7,  therefore,  points  out  to  the  reader  that  two 
readings  are  contained  here:  one  "'^^'^  V^^  HPlN  "^3)1  ''3,  the 
other  1^*"'  J32  npl^^  "^(l-^  "^-^  ^^  ^^®  consider  what  an  easy 
mental  process  the  transposition  of  letters  is  in  rapid  writing, 
it  will  be  readily  understood  how  effective  a  combination  of  this 
kind  would  be. 

CHAPTER  XXI. 

3.  ^jbS^  ^'f)B  DlpP  b^  'nyii'  D'^I^jH  nvXl  "And  I  have 
appointed  the  young  men  to  such  and  such  a  place",  R.  V.  The 
form  TiyiV  has  been  explained  by  Ewald  (Lehrhuch  der 
Hebrdische7i  Sprache,  §125')  as  the  Po'el  from  yT-  But  this 
is  found  nowhere  else.  The  phrase  is  clearly  a  combination  of 
two    readings:    one    "D  U)0t2  b^  '^"^y^   the    other   "rinlH 


38        ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

"3  DipP  ri^l.  The  first  reading  is  suggested  by  the  prep.  ^^ 
and  "^  as  the  first  consonant  in  "'Hy'lV;  the  second  reading  has 
its  characteristic  marks  in  the  verb  ^nyiV,  ^  being  the  only 
letter  that  requires  any  change.  Driver  (ad  loc.)  suggests  either 
the  Po'el  or  the  Hiph.  of  "j^^  as  the  correct  reading  here.  The 
form  of  the  combination,  however,  does  not  suggest  the  Hiph., 
and  the  Po'el  is  found  nowhere  else.  Of  course  the  prep.  7^ 
cannot  be  retained  with  the  Hiph.  of  ^"1"',  but  must  be  changed 
to  rii^j  the  form  Timlin  taking  two  accusatives.  Either  of 
these  two  constructions  fits  the  context,  and  is  grammatically 
correct. 

9.  n^:n  ~T  nnn  nb  ^'^_  p^^l  "And  is  there  not  here 
under  thy  hand  a  spear"?  This  unparallelled  pointing  of  Ji^ 
directs  the  reader  to  look  for  the  reason  for  it.  Inevitably  an- 
other short  word  pointed  with  Hireq  comes  to  mind,  namely  Q^^. 
Objection  to  reading  Q^  here  has  been  raised  (Driver,  ad  loc.) 
on  the  ground  that  Q^^  is  always  used  to  introduce  a  question 
to  which  the  answer  "no"  is  expected,  and  therefore  is  not  suit- 
able here.  But  granting  that  such  is  the  exclusive  use  of  Q^ 
in  questions  (except  where  it  continues  the  force  of  H ) ,  its  use 

here  would  still  only  emphasize  the  contingency  in  the  question : 
"there  is  not  possibly  here  under  thy  hand  a  spear?"    The  Greek 

also    supports   this    reading ;    it   has   "I8e   ei  eanv  ivravOa  VTTO  TTjv  xei/3a 

aov  86pv  ^  pofjicfiaLa.     On  the  other  hand,  the  combination  t^^'*'  l^^ 

is  found  also  in  Ps.  135 :  17,  and  seems  to  be  recognized  as  legiti- 
mate (BDB,  p.  442'^).  The  question,  if  that  reading  be  adopted, 
would  be  indicated  in  the  tone  of  the  voice.  The  text  clearly 
contains  two  readings,  the  one  being  n3  t^'*'  D 5*5,  as  supported 
by  the  Greek;  the  other  may  be  either  H^  J^"'"'  p^,  with  the 
parallel  in  Ps.  135:'  17  as  its  justification,  or  else  may  be  only 
nS  )*'i^>  which  the  Syriac  seems  to  represent,  l-='oi  zu^. 
14.     □n^ri;3  l^^yC:  n^  l^t^'^l    "And  he  changed  it,  even  his 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.         39 

behavior,  before  them",  Driver.  "The  emphatic  anticipation  of 
an  object  such  as  UVID  is  not  probable,  and  the  form  of  the  suffix 

—  rare  even  in  strong  verbs  —  is  found  only  once  besides  with 
a  verb  n"'?,  H  S.  14:  6,  where  there  are  mdependent  grounds 
for  questioning  its  correctness.     No  doubt  ^^'C"^)  is  an  error  of 

transcription  for    nilL^*"'V'   (Driver,  acHocj.    But  on  the  analogy 

of  several  other  passages  (see  the  note  on  18:  1)  including  II  S. 
14 :  6,  where  Driver  admits  that  the  consonants  were  intended  to 
designate  a  plur.  form,  it  seems  at  least  plausible  that  the  conso- 
nants here  were  meant  to  suggest  a  3rd  masc.  plur.  of  the  pi'el 
impf.  ^Jt^'^T_,  "and  they  changed".    Note  that  both  Grk.  and  Syr. 

read  singular  suffix,  V^"'^^,  "before  him"  (Achish).  The  peculiar 
form  is  here,  as  well  as  in  the  similar  passage  referred  to,  meant 
to  call  the  reader's  attention  to  the  two  traditions,  one  having 
the  sing,   (in  this  case   W^'Y  or  n^I^^^l),  the  other  the  plur.   (in 

this  case  ^jj^'"'!^).    Pointing  the  1  as  1  seems  to  be  a  conventional 

way  of  indicating  that  there  is  possible  a  choice  between  sing, 
and  plur.    Cf.  the  notes  on  18:  1  and  II  S.  14:  6. 

CHAPTER  -XXII. 

13.     b^'^'C  ^b\^  "irO^^^l    "And  Saul  said  unto  him".    The  Qere 
is  V7i<.    This  case  and  its  only  parallel  Zech.  2:  8  (cf.  1*;^^  and 

the  notes  on  2 :  10  and  II  S.  20 :  8)  have  been  associated  by  Konig 
(II,  p.  303)  with  the  plural  nouns  which  have  the  3rd  masc.  sing, 
suffix  T  attached  without  an  intervening  "i.  But  the  situation 
here  is  different.  Both  here  and  in  Zech.  2:  8  y)^  follows  im- 
mediately  upon  li^^^^l^-  And  considering  that  "IJC'^^  is  followed 
innumerable  times  now  by  'p,  now  by  7^5,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  l';)^^  is  a  combination  of  Si  and  Vp^- 


40         ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

CHAPTER  XXV. 

14-  0^*11^.3"^  "in^^  *II7^  "One  of  the  young  men".  This  ex- 
pression is  certainly  too  full.  Greek  B  represents  only  UT]^ 
D'^^iy.UnD;  L  has  eV  Twv  Tj-aiSapLMv  (xtto  twv  Trat'Swv ;  and  Syriac  agrees 
with  the  Hebrew.  It  seems  that  two  readings  must  have  been 
combined  here,  one  being  a^^iy^HD  IVl^,  cf.  9:  3;  the  other 

•T  :  -  ••         T  v 

was  perhaps  "IH^  ^V^  "a  certain  young  man". 

17.  in^3  b^  bv)  ^T^l^  ^^  "Against  our  master,  and 
against  all  his  house".  "^^^  and  ^p  are  here  interchanged  in  the 
same  expression,  each  one  representing  a  different  tradition. 
See  Introduction,  p.  19,  and  the  note  on  14 :  10  and  12. 

34.   "Tl^^lD^  ^n^^bni  n^lnD  ^'^l'^  '^Except  thou  hadst  hasted 

Tl:  •         :  T-    :     :  -   •       ••     . 

and  come  to  me".     This  form,  Tl^^^Hl^  has  already  been  pro- 

:  T- 

nounced  a  combination  by  Nestle  (ZAW.  XIV,  319).  There  is 
seemingly  no  difficulty  in  accepting  it  as  a  combination  of  the 
impf.  ''^bm   and  the  perf.   pl^D^-     But  the  Massoretes  give  a 

•  .    T-  :       T 

Qere  r\^'2DV.  This  seems  to  be  a  kind  of  correction  of  the  Ketlb 
^nt*53m ;    see  the  Introduction,  pp.  22  ff.    For  other  explanations 

:  T  ~ 

of  this  and  similar  cases  see  Ges.  76'\  48'^ ;  Kon.  I,  p.  647. 

CHAPTER  XXVI. 

12.  b)^\lJ  ^ni^'^^ID  "From  Saul's  head",  R.  V.  These  words 
are  admittedly  suspicious  (see  Driver,  ad  loc.) .  One  question  is, 
can  "^510  for  "^^'HiD^D  be  considered  permissible?  Another 
arises  concerning  this  lone  instance  of  i  attached  to  the  constr. 
state  of  the  fem.  plur.  before  an  independent  word  (otherwise 
only  occurring  before  suffixes) .  And  independently  of  these  dif- 
ficulties comes  the  objection,  that  Plli^'^ip  is  nowhere  else  found 
except  with  a  suffix.  With  the  aid  of  the  Greek,  which  renders 
Vnti^^1DD»  the  problem  is  solved  if  we  assume  that  two  read- 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.         41 

ings  have  been  combined :  ^^^Z'  Z'^^!2  "from  Saul's  head"  and 

T  •• 

Vnt^'^5"lL}^-    (lit.)  "from  the  parts  about  his  head". 

T       — .  -  :    • 

15.  T]>jnv^  "r^^S  r\1D^  ^b  nr:h)  "Why  hast  thou  not  kept 
watch  over  thy  lord?"  ^!2Z'  i^  ^^t  generally  used  with  ^^.  The 
next  verse  has  7^  in  the  same  kind  of  construction.  The  two 
cases  are  found  in  close  enough  proximity  to  suggest  that  two 
traditions  existed,  one  with  7^  in  both  places,  one  with  '^y. 
Cf.  note  on  14 :  10  and  12.    See  also  II  S.  11 :  16. 

16.  'in2:^*N"ip  ni^\^.  D^^n  nnp^  n^i  r^br^^n  n^:n  \^?  nvsn 

"See  where  the  king's  spear  is,  and  the  cruse  of  water  that  was 
at  his  head".  We  should  expect  here  that  the  construction  would 
be  the  same  for  the  two  objects  mentioned  —  either  "f^   in  both 

places,  or  n5<l.     The  fact  that  we  have  in  one  place  "i^^,  and  in 

the  other  n^^  is  probably  a  clue  to  alternative  readings,  one  with 

■^5^  uniformly,  and  one  with  p^.     Greek  B  probably  had  "i^  and 

n^  in  reversed  order,  for  it  reads :  i'Se  ^  rb  S6pv  tov  /Jua-tXews  Kal  o 

(^ttKos  TOV  iTSaros,   irov  ecrriv  to,  Trpo?  Ke</)aA^?  avTOV,     L   SeemS   tO   represent 

''^  in  both  places  by  the  following  translation :   I8k  ttov  ia-rl  ro  B6pv 

TOV  /JacTiXews  kol  6  <^a/<6s  tov  JSaros  to.  Trpo?  K€.(f)a\rj<;  avTOv. 

CHAPTER  XXVII. 

10.  DVn  Dripi^D  ^^?  "Against  whom  have  ye  made  a  raid  to- 
day?" R.  V.  This  translation  is  more  than  can  be  gotten  from 
the  Hebrew.  It  is  made  on  the  basis  of  the  Greek  and  the  Vulg., 
which  represent  "i^  b^-     Driver  prefers  to  read    (^^,  "where" 

or  "whither"?  But  it  is  more  natural  to  suppose  that  the  word 
"i^    had  fallen  out,  as  indicated  by  LXX  and  Vulg.     The  latter 

part  of  the  verse  bears  out  this  supposition.  In  David's  answer 
to  the  question  three  districts  are  mentioned,  against  which  he 
had  made  a  raid.     But    7^  is  used  twice  and    ^^  once  for  this 

Library  Publications,    ,1. 


42        ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

"against".  This  circumstance  makes  quite  certain  the  conjecture 
that  b^  is  a  combination  of  7];  and  7^.  Compare  this  situation 
with  that  of  20 :  24,  25.  The  two  seem  almost  identical.  In 
20:  24  b^  and  7^  are  combined  into  7^.  Then  follow  in  v.  25 
one  7y  and  one  ^^ .  Here  the  combination  is  made  differently 
—  ^^  instead  of  ^y—  and  no  marginal  note  is  found.  But  the 
subsequent  interchange  of  'py  and  7^  was  perhaps  considered 
sufficient  explanation  of  7^. 

CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

2.     i;iri   nn^5   "Thou  shalt  know".     Greek  and  Vulg.  have 
_ ..        y  - 

nn  nny  "now  thou  shalt  know".  In  several  places  where 
nn^  or  nny  occurs,  there  seems  to  be  evidence  that  two  tradi- 

T    -  T   - 

tions  existed,  one  with  nV)^,  the  other  with  nrW-    No  attempt, 

T   -  T   - 

however,  has  been  found  in  the  books  of  Samuel  to  combine  the 
two  in  the  text,  and  no  marginal  note  throughout  these  books 
directs  us  to  read  one  of  these  two  words  instead  of  the  other, 
or  rather  as  an  alternative  reading  with  the  other.  It  is  probable 
that  the  similarity  in  sound  between  the  two  words  was  con- 
sidered sufficiently  plain  suggestion  to  the  reader  that  two  read- 
ings were  possible,  in  cases  such  as  are  referred  to  above.  Cf. 
V.  22 ;  II  S.  7 :  20 ;  18 :  3.  It  may  be  said  in  regard  to  this  passage 
that  to  have  the  personal  pronoun  expressed  as  here  is  an  unusual 
and  emphatic  construction,  which  would  readily  suggest  the 
easier  and  more  usual   nrH?)  while,  if  HDV  were  found  in  the 

T  -  T  - 

text,  it  would  not  so  readily  suggest  the  more  unusual  riD^- 

15.  rh  n5<;*lp5<n  "Therefore  I  have  called  thee",  R.  V.  This 
has  already  by  Nestle  (Marginalien,  p.  15)  been  explained  as  a 
double  reading.  In  reference  to  the  many  different  attempts  to 
account  for  the  word  he  writes :  "1st  es  so  schwer  zu  sehen,  dass 
die  Schreibung  uns  zur  Wahl  stellt,  ob  wir  an  i^lp   rufen  oder 

tIt 

an  rDO  begegnen  denken  wollen:  so  rief  ich  Dich  i<"np^^1,  so 

tIt  t):  vt 

kam  ich  Dir  entgegen  d.  h.  zu  Dir  H^lp^^l?" 


ALTERNATIV'E  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.         43 

CHAPTER  XXX. 

21.  □D"'^^!  "And  they  made  them  to  abide".  The  defective 
writing  of  □^''t^'^l^  suggests  the  sing.  Q^^C^*^]^,  though  not  neces- 
sarily. In  this  case,  however,  the  sing,  is  borne  out  by  the  Ver- 
sions, and  the  writing  □^''C*''!  instead  of  □l!^''Ci-'^|  may  here  be 

intended  as  a  combination.  The  context  is  suited  by  either 
reading. 

22.  jn^  ^^^7  ^i^y  0')n  ^'P  ^Z'^,  "Because  they  went  not  with 
us,  we  will  not  give  them,  etc.".  ^;^y  refers  to  "the  group  re- 
garded as  a  unity,  and  spoken  of  accordingly  in  first  ps.  sing." 
(Driver,  ad  loc).     Nevertheless,  the  juxtaposition  of  ^}2V  and 

jnj  is  an  indication  of  two  readings  combined,  .one  with  the 
plural  uniformly,  and  one  with  the  singular.  The  Versions  read 
plur.  ^J;^17.    Cf.  II  S.  21 :  4,  where  the  situation  seems  to  be  the 

T    • 

same,  but  where  the  Massoretes  evidently  considered  a  marginal 
note  needed  as  an  explanation.  The  changing  moods  of  a  scribe 
may  account  for  the  lack  of  a  Qere  here,  while  II  S.  21 :  4  has  one. 
In  a  certain  mood  he  would  consider  the  combination  obvious 
enough  without  a  marginal  note,  in  another  not. 

CHAPTER  XXXI. 

"I^'d'p  i^iO  □^nS^^'^S  "And  they  cut  off  his  head,  and  stripped 
off  his  armor,  and  sent  into  the  land  of  the  Philistines  round 
about,  to  carry  the  tidings",  R.  V.  The  critical  word  here  is 
^n^^'^1  •  It  represents  two  readings:  in'pC'^]  "and  they  sent 
(word)"  and  inpii^^l  "^^^  ^^^^  ^^^^  ^^^^  olDJects  mentioned)". 
The  first  reading  is  suggested  by  the  context,  since  no  object  is 
expressed  and  I^O'p  follows.  The  second  reading  is  actually 
found  in  the  text  unmistakably  supported  by  the  pointing.  The 
object,  expected  after  the  Pi'el  of  n'^t^'.  can  easily  be  supplied 


44        ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

from  the  clause  immediately  preceding.  Greek  L  represents  the 
first  reading,  and  B  and  the  Syriac  the  second.  It  should  be 
noted,  that  if  the  word  had  been  pointed  as  Qal  IH^D'^'l,  there 
would  have  been  nothing  to  indicate  a  different  tradition.  This 
was  evidently  the  only  possible  way  to  combine  the  two  readings. 
See  Introduction,  page  21. 

9.  Oyn  n^^l  nn^^^y  n^3  "ife^?^  "To  carry  the  tidings 
unto  the  house  of  their  idols  and  to  the  people".  Greek  and 
I  Chr.  10:  8  have  pli^  instead  of  p"'?-  Syriac  has  an  equivalent 
to  the  Hebrew  except  for  reversed  order.  It  is  possible  that  two 
readings  have  been  combined  here ;  one  identical  with  our  Hebrew 
text,  the  other  one  having  ri^5  instead  of  ri''3>  ^s  I  Chr.  and 
the  Greek.  Only  the  one  reading  is  put  into  the  text,  the  other 
one  is  suggested  by  the  context  and  by  Qyri    Pii^V    It  is  a  case 

T  T  •.•  : 

similar  to  the  one  described  in  the  preceding  note.  See  Introduc- 
tion, page  21. 


Alternative  Readings  m  tlie  Second  Book 
oi   Samuel. 


CHAPTER  I. 

21.     y37;i2  ''in    ''Ye  mountains  of  Gilboa".  The  mixture  here 

of  the  construct  state  with  the  preposition  is  similar  to  that  in 
IS.  9:  3  and  IIS.  10:  9. 


CHAPTER  II. 

9.  ''^yV'^yV'^yi"^^^V''p5^V'':?vX  inr^p;^  "And  he  made  Mm 
king  over",  etc.  This  is  perhaps  the  most  striking  case  of  ^^ 
and  7y  interchanged,  ^^  thrice,  then  7^  thrice.  Compare  it 
with  I  S.  9 :  4,  where  the  sing,  and  the  plur.  are  mixed  about  as 
evenly  as  here  7^  and  7^^- 

CHAPTER  III. 

13.  '^^^'^n  ^:p^  05^  ^5  ^:2  PsX  n^nn  s^?  "Thou  shalt  not 
see  my  face,  except  thou  first  bring",  etc.  '^^^^  is  not  used  as 
an  adverb  elsewhere,  and  cannot  be  translated  "first"  legitimately. 
Greek  and  Syriac  do  not  support  ^JD/-  "D^  "^2  and  ^^2*7  are 
mutually  exclusive"  (BDB,  p.  474'^).  We  have  here  plainly  a 
combination  of  the  two  readings:  n^<^!}n  C^5  "'3  "unless  you 
bring"  and  Tji^^DH  "'jcb  "before  you  bring". 

18.  n^5  v^z')n  n::r  in  i'3  ^b^^  m  '^n*  i?^^^  ^P^. 


46     ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

^^^iti'^  "i^y    "Jehovah  hath  spoken  of   (or  to)   David,  saying, 

••  T  :   •        •  - 

By  the  hand  of  my  servant  David  /  will  save  my  people  Israel". 
This  translation,  requiring  the  change  of  p^J^lH  into  i;^^»'1^,  is 
supported  by  the  Versions.  But  cannot  the  text  be  under- 
stood in  another  way?  If  v^^e  read  UCi^'ln,  Hiph.  inf.  absol.,  or 
y^^iHA  inf.  constr.,  we  may  translate:  "By  the  hand  of  my 

servant  David  (shall  come)  the  salvation  of  my  people  Israel." 
That  both  of  these  possibilities  are  intended  by  the  present  text 
seems  very  probable. 

25.  Tj^Ninb  n^<l  T^^^^D  n^  "Thy  going  out  and  thy  coming 
in".  Ketib  r^^)'26;  Qere  T^^iiD-  The  Qere  of  this  verse  and 
the  same  word  (except  for  the  suffix)  found  in  the  text  in  Ez. 
43:  11  have  been  perplexing.  Driver  (ad  loc.)  says:  "Why  the 
abnormal  (and  incorrect)  form  ?]^5DlD  should  be  substituted  as 
Qri  unless  for  the  sake  of  the  assonance  with  T]i<l^iC  is  not 
apparent."  Konig  II,  p.  127,  "nur  Nachahmung  des  vorausge- 
henden  Wortes."  But  these  explanations  are  not  wholly  satis- 
fying. And  there  is  another  explanation  which  is  much  more 
natural,  and  is  borne  out  by  evidence.  The  reason  for  substi- 
tuting Tj^^^iD  as  the  Qere  was  to  indicate  to  the  reader  that 
some  authorities  have  TjJ^ylQ  H^^  and  Tj^^nC  n^^  in  reversed 
order.  Greek  L  has  these  two  words  in  reversed  order :  rr/v  eto-oSdv 
aov  Koi  rriv  e^oSov  aov .  If  the  tcxt  had  been  left  as  it  was^ — correct 
enough  in  itself — this  tradition  with  the  words  in  different  order 
would  have  been  lost.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed  for  a  moment, 
then,  that  anyone  actually  read  Q.  as  given  here  in  the  margin. 
The  note  was  there  simply  to  point  out  the  double  reading.  The 
case  in  Ez.  43:  11  is  exactly  the  same,  except  that  there  the  text 
itself  already  had  the  double  reading  preserved,  and  no  marginal 
note  was  considered  necessary.  The  Syriac  of  the  Ezekiel  pas- 
sage represents  the  tradition  that  has  the  reversed  word-order. 
This  Qere  and  the  one  in  I  S.  25 :  34  should  be  noted  as  most 
remarkable  instances  of  the  Massoretes  "improving"  the  text,  in 
the  one  case  to  clarify  the  combination  of  two  readings,  in  the 
other  to  bring  about  such  a  combination.  See  the  Introduction, 
page  24  f. 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.      47 

29.    V^v^  n^3  b^  b^}  2^V  Z'^^  bv  t>n'   "Let  it  fall  upon 

•   T  •  •        T         ■.•  :        T  -  :  T 

the  head  of  Joab,  and  upon  all  his  father's  house",  R.  V.  Inter- 
change of  7^  and  ^y,  denoting  double  tradition.  See  the  note 
on  2 :  9. 

CHAPTER  V. 

2.     b^yL'^,  m  ^???ni  ^^>*i?2  L^^']k}  ^^^^  "I*  ^^'^^  thou  that 
leddest  out  and  broughtest  in  Israel".    Ketib  ^2D^  ^''IflD  ^'^"^ 

...  .  T     •  T 

"Thou  wast  leading  out  and  bringing  in,"  or  "Thou  wast  wont 
to  lead  out  and  to  bring  in  (Israel)."  Qere  ^2'^^\]  N'l^i*^n  H^'H 
"Thou  wast  the  one  that  leddest  out  and  broughtest  in."  Here 
it  is  especially  the  division  of  the  words  that  indicates  to  the 
reader  the  two  constructions.    K.  makes  n'''^n  and  the  following 

T      •  T 

participles  without  the  article  a  sort  of  compound  tense,  denoting 
customary  action  in  past  time  (Ges.  IIGO,  while  in  Q.  the  part- 
iciples are  the  predicate  after  ri''Ti.     It  is  worth  noting,  that 

T      •  T 

there  was  seemingly  no  way  of  showing  directly  in  the  text  in 
regard  to  the  article  prefixed  to  ^'2i2  that  it  could  be  kept  in  the 

text  or  left  out,  as  was  the  case  with  the  article  of    ^<^y1^. 

This  n  was  attached  to  the  preceding   ^1^'"|,  the  pronunciation 

and  meaning  of  which  were  not  thereby  affected,  and  the  reader 
could  be  expected  to  treat  the  two  articles  uniformly,  whether 
he  would  keep  them  both  or  delete  them  both.  See  Intr.,  p.  14  f. 
8.  "in  ^^"C;3  1^^^'  "That  are  hated  of  David's  soul",  R.  V. 
Ketib  )^^f^;    Qere  "'^5^2^*.    Of  this  verse  Driver  says  (ad  loc.)  : 

"It  is  easier  on  this  passage  to  say  what  it  does  not  mean  than 
what  it  does  mean."  Because  of  the  evident  corruption  of  the 
passage  it  is  hard  to  determine  what  the  Ketib  is.  But  it  may 
be  the  3rd  plur.  masc.  perf.  Qal  ^^^Z*. 


48      ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

20.    rW^"'  riD^)     "For   thou    knowest."     Here   LXX    read: 

4,   T  :    -T         T  -  : 

Koi  vvv  (TV  otSas.     Syriac  has:   ^\  "^r-»  ^^1.     It  may  be  that    nV)^ 

T  - 

here  was  meant  to  suggest  also    nDV  -    Cf.  the  note  on  I  S.  28:  2. 

T   - 

23.    The  mixture  of  2nd  and  3rd  pers.  and  of  sing,  and  plur. 
in  this  verse  has  been  explained  by  Geiger  (Urschrift,  p.  288). 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

14.    □''DliJ  Dt  Di-Iv^  b^2  0^-2)^:  D)n^2  Um  "And  he  put 

•    •  :         T  •.• :       T  :  •  •   :  •.:•.•        ■.•  t- 

garrisons  in  Edom ;  throughout  all  Edom  put  he  garrisons."  Greek 
L  agrees  with  the  Hebrew,  but  B  does  not  render  D^Dl^J  Di^. 
Syriac  seems  to  render  only  the  second  half  of  the  phrase: 
>co?1  ovl^a^  U^a.-_D  y-^o?  >a-Lj]c.  Two  readings  have  probably  been 
put  into  the  text  here  side  by  side:  D''^!^^  Q'l*'^3  Op^]:  ^^d 
CDIJJ  Df^  Di*I^   7D^1-     One  of  the  two  is  certainly  super- 

•   •  :        T  v:       T  : 

fluous. 


CHAPTER  X. 

9.  ^^"I^P  ^"1in2  b^O  "Of  all  the  choice  men  of  Israel", 
R.  V.  Ketib  b^^l^'^2  CniH?  "The  choice  men  in  Israel"; 
Qere   7^1  j^"*  ^"liriB   "The  choice  men  of  Israel".    It  would  seem 

••   T :    •        ••        : 

that  no  marginal  note  would  be  needed  to  explain  these  words, 
for  the  two  readings  are  apparent  even  after  a  casual  examina- 
tion. Furthermore,  the  construct  state  before  a  prep,  occurs 
often  in  Hebrew  and  has  analogies  in  other  Semitic  languages, 
so  that  there  are  reasons  for  considering  it  grammatically  cor- 
rect (Ges.  130^0 .  In  the  books  of  Samuel  we  have  at  least  two 
instances  of  this  construction,  I  S.  9 :  3  and  II  S.  1 :  21,  the  notes 
on  which  see.  The  purpose  of  the  marginal  note  here  seems  to 
be,  therefore,  not  to  explain  the  meaning  of  the  phrase,  but  rather 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.      49 

to  point  out  that  some  authorities  read    b^'lt'^3    C^"nn2   and 
others    b^^t''^   ^inS- 


CHAPTER  XII. 

22.  nlrP  ^^^ni  y"lV  'P  "Who  knoweth  whether  Jehovah 
will  not  be  gracious  to  me,"  R.  V.  Ketlb  ^j^PI^  Qci'<''  ^jjill- 
"The  correction  of  the  Qri  is  unnecessary :  the  Kt.  is  exactly  like 
Joel  2 :  14 ;  Jon.  3  :  9"  (Driver,  ad  loc.) .    But  it  is  not  a  correction. 

31.  J5^P5  "I^"  or  "with  the  brickkiln"  or  "brickmoulcl." 
Ketlb  p'pj^n;  Qere  pp^3.  K.  is  probably  only  an  error;  yet 
the  ^  and  the  peculiar  context  here  suggest  possible  influence 
of  the  phrase  Tl^r^^  t:'^^2  *1 '^^H    "to  devote  by  fire  to  Melek", 

instances  of  which  are  found  in  Jer.  32 :  35  and  II  Kings  23 :  10. 
It  should  be  noted  too  that  in  the  preceding  verse  a  word  is  found 
w^hich  contains  the  radicals  of  Tj^?p,  the  god,  and  by  some  (see 
LXX)  was  actually  read  as  DbplO,  Milcom.  There  is  a  possi- 
bility therefore  that  K.  here  is  intended  to  bring  to  mind  the 
phrase  mentioned  above,  giving  it  the  derisive  turn,     1"'2yn 

:    •  :  T 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

6.    1i%^  r\D^)  "iHv^n  n^S  nn^n  ISn   "But  the  one  smote  the 

•.•   T-  T    •.-    T  •.•  T    •/   T 

other,  and  killed  him,"  R.  V.  This  is  one  of  the  passages  cited 
by  Ges.  (GO*^)  and  Driver  (on  I  S.  21 :  14)  as  containing  imper- 
fects with  the  suffix    ^n_,  contracted  to  1.    But  see  the  note  on 

T 

I  S.  18:  1.  In  his  note  on  the  present  passage,  Driver  admits 
that  "Probably  the  consonants  l^'"'!  were  meant  originally  to 
express  a  plural,  which  arose  through  a  false  interpretation  of 
in^5n"n^5  in^n  (as  though  this  were  "one  another")  ;  and 
V^^^"n^5  m^n  nn  should  be  restored  from  LXX."  But  the 
change  of  "iPINn   fli^  into  VH^^  n^<>  on  the  basis  of  tov  d8€\<jiov 


50      ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

avTod  being  the  original  reading  of  LXX  rather  than  tov  cVa 
(Driver,  Notes  on  Samuel,  p.  237,  footnote)  does  in  no  way  neces- 
sitate the  elimination  of  the    1  of  13^1.     Compare  Ex.  32:  27; 

Mic.  7:  2;  Gen.  11:  3,  v^^here  the  similar  expressions  ^>5«^ 
Vn{<:  n^?  and  inyn  b^  C:^'\^5are  found  with  the  plur.  of  the 
verb.  It  is  rather  the  pointing  of  the  )  as  1  that  must  be  ac- 
counted for.  The  situation  here  seems  to  be  the  same  as  in 
I  S.  18:  1  and  21:  14  (the  notes  on  which  see)  as  well  as  in 
Hos.  8 :  3 ;  Ps.  35 :  8 ;  Jer.  23 :  6 ;  Eccl.  4 :  12 ;  Josh.  2 :  4,  where 
(with  the  exception,  perhaps,  of  Ps.  35 :  8)  the  1  could  be  pointed 
•1 ,  making  the  respective  verbs  plur.  instead  of  sing,  with  the 
suffix.  The  reason  for  the  extraordinary  pointing  seems  to  have 
been  a  desire  to  combine  the  sing,  and  the  plur.  into  one  form 
which  should  give  the  reader  his  choice.  In  some  other  cases, 
where  evidently  the  same  purpose  was  in  the  mind  of  the  scribe, 
he  made  a  marginal  note  showing  that  there  was  authority  both 
for  the  sing,  and  the  plur.,  e.  g.  I  S.  12:  10;  15:  16.  It  seems 
therefore  that  Ifl^n  r\^  "IH^JH  13^1  is  a  combination  of  two 
readings.    One  was  "IH^^H  n^^  "iH^n  D^l;  the  other  was  7]^] 

T    •/   T  T    •••   T 

,        T-         ••  -    :  -  ..        I    ...     ..;        T     :  ..        )•..  •.•  -         T        t:  :  • 

nriD/  "Let  the  king  remember,  I  pray,  Jehovah  thy  God,  that 
the  avenger  of  blood  destroy  not  any  more."  Thus,  if  we  adopt 
Qere  n^^np  (intending  ni3"inp?  The  vowel  in  the  final 
syllable  may  be  merely  a  warning  of  the  fact  of  a  double  reading ; 
see  the  note  on  I  Sam.  4:  13).  What  the  Ketib  is,  is  a  matter 
of  some  uncertainty.  Besides  the  context,  the  only  clue  to  it  is 
the  ^  inserted  between  ^  and  p.  The  consonants  in  the  text 
resemble  the  noun  n^31p,  "greatness"  (cf.  II  Chr.  9:6).  The 
Syriac  would  perhaps  seem  to  favor  this  word:  Itn-X  Uj^?  ^.s^^j 
V.a-:^  y  ]:^^^  U'=— ?  lU^a-ior;,  and  the  context  would  not  be  badly 
suited  by  it.  The  translation,  if  this  word  be  adopted  as  the 
Ketib,  would  be:  "Let  the  king  remember,  I  pray,  with  (the  help 
of)  Jehovah  thy  God,  the  greatness  of  the  avenger  of  blood  to 
destroy",  i.  e.,  his  great  desire  and  power  to  destroy.  ■  The  con- 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.      51 

sonantal  difference  between  K.  and  Q.  would  then  however  in- 
volve not  only  the  ^,  as  indicated  by  the  text,  but  also  the  n, 
of  which  the  text  makes  no  indication.  Another  possible  Ket'ib 
is  n''3  InC,    which  would  make  the  translation :  "Let  the  king 

remember,  I  pray,  with  Jehovah  thy  God,  (that)  the  house  (i.  e., 
family)  of  the  avenger  of  blood  hasteneth  to  destroy."  The  sense 
thus  rendered  would  fit  the  context  admirably.  We  would  have 
here  an  urgent  appeal  that  the  king  might  waste  no  time  in  ful- 
filling his  promises  of  protection,  since  the  avenger  of  blood,  and 
in  fact  "the  ivhole  family"   (v.  7;  note  also  the  plur.   TT'^*d^_ 

immediately  following  here  in  vs.  11)  hastened  to  destroy.  This 
reading  as  the  Ketlh  would  involve  no  more  changes  of  the  con- 
sonant text  than  are  already  suggested  by  n*'3'nnp' 

21.     Tl^^'y   "I  ^^ave  done."     In  some  manuscripts  this  word 
has  against  it  a  note,  supplying  fl^t^'y  as  Qere.    In  others  the 

T        •      T 

text  has  n"'t^*i;  and  the  margin  \"l^t^'y  .    See  Introduction,  p.  12. 

T        •      T  ^  •        •      T 

The  Versions  favor  ^ri''^*i7- 


CHAPTER-  XV. 

8.    ^JD^i^*'^  'TZ^^  □^5    "If  Jehovah  shall  indeed  bring  me  again 

.....  y 

(to  Jerusalem) ",  R.  V.  We  have  here  a  case,  where  neither  the 
Ketlh  (hitherto  thought  to  be  3^^^'^ ;  see  Driver,  ad  loc,  and 
Baer)  nor  the  Qere  '2\Z^^  seems  to  satisfy  the  demands  of  gram- 

T 

mar  and  sense.  "Kt.  ^^Ci-*''  'if  he  brings  back,  brings  me  back,'  — 
an  utterly  un-Hebraic  sentence.  Qri  ^il^'\  from  2^'^  to  dwell, 
unsuitable  beside  ^45''tL^*''  will  bring  hack"  (Driver,  ad  loc.) .  But 
can  we  not  suppose  that  the  Massoretes  also  knew  that  2iu^ 
to' dwell  was  unsuitable,  ordinarily  speaking,  beside  ^y^pZJ^Jvill 
bring  hack?  Knowing  that,  they  must  have  had  some  extra- 
ordinary reason  for  putting  2)Z'^   in  the  margin  as  a  variant  of 

T 

'2'^Z;^ ;  and  nothing  furnishes  us  with  a  hiore  plausible  reason 
than  the  supposition  that  they  wished  by  such  pointing  to  indi- 


52      ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

cate  that  two  readings  were  combined  in  this  passage.  They 
knew  that  by  pointing  the  first  word  ^W^,  the  inf.  absolute  of 

T 

'2^*',    they  would  inevitably  lead  the  reader  to  continue  with  the 

-  T 

only  logical  form  under  the  circumstances,  namely  '•^2''^*"',  "If 

Jehovah  shall  indeed  cause  me  to  dwell  in  Jerusalem."  This 
reading  is  already  assured,  it  should  be  noted,  by  the  contrasted 
''ivhile  I  dwelt   i^D^p'Z)   in  Geshur,"  in  the  first  half  of  this 

very  verse.    The  other  reading  is  ^J^^ti^''  D^t^'H  D{<  "If  Jehovah 

.....        .  .J. 

shall  indeed  bring  me  again,"  with  which  the  Versions  agree. 
With  the  form  cf.  infin.  absol.  ppH  •  It  is  perhaps  more  prob- 
able, however,  that  the  i  is  merely  a  'warning  letter' ;  see  note 
on  I  Sam.  4 :  13.  We  find,  then,  that  both  constructions  are  about 
equally  well  represented  in  the  text,  one  word  being  pointed 
entirely  according  to  the  one  reading,  the  other  entirely  according 
to  the  other.     Since   ''^^^2^''',  representing  the  verb   3^'1>  is  so 

similar  to  iJ^^D*''    from    '2,'^'^,  it  seems  the  Massoretes  feared 
....  -  .J. 

that  the  reading  ^^^^t^»^   D^C^'H   would  be  entirely  lost,  and  so 
.....         .  .J. 

wrote  "I  in  'y'^lj^  instead  of  ),  so  as  to  suggest  the  root    'y\'^. 

T 

See  Introduction,  pages  22,  23. 

21.  D^^  ""3.  Ketlh  U^  ^2  "(by  no  means)  but";  Qere  ^^ 
"surely".  Driver  here  thinks  "the  Qri  is  right".  But  compare 
his  note  on  13 :  83.  The  oath  is  sometimes  used  absolutely  ( Jud. 
8:  19;  Ruth  3 :  13;  1  S.  20:  21),  and  can  be  considered  so  used 
here.  The  Q^^  "^3  then  begins  the  statement  in  the  sense  indi- 
cated above.    The  Qere  is  in  form  like  3:9;  see  Driver,  ad  loc. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

2.  Dn.^nbr  Xei?-6  on^n^r'And  for  fighting";  Qere  On^ni 
"And  the  bread".  It  is  strange  that  the  commentators  have  not 
stumbled  upon  the  meaning  of  the  Ketih  in  this  passage.  Driver, 
ad  loc.,  describes  it  as  "an  example  of  the  accidental  repetition 
of  a  letter  from  a  preceding  word."     Baer  gives  the  Ket^h  as 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.      53 

□  n'pn?'''  "^^^  sense,  if  K.  be  adopted,  is  "the  asses  are  for  the 
king's  household  to  ride  on  (lit.  for  riding)  and  for  fighting." 
The  Versions  support  the  Qere. 

13.  -iSyi  "  ^|?p^l  h)>^\\  TjiSl  "  "^n  ^V^V'V  The  mixture 
of  tenses  in  this  verse  is  very  exceptional,  and  may  indicate  that 
different  traditions  existed.  Because  of  certain  freedom  fre- 
quently exercised  in  the  use  of  tenses  (cf.  13:  19;  I  S.  19:  23), 
it  is  however  a  difficult  matter  to  say  definitely  what  these  dif- 
ferent traditions  were.  One  may  have  had  all  the  verbs  after 
TllSl  in  the  infinitive  absolute.  The  other  probably  had  l^y^T 
instead  of  *12U1»  while  otherwise  agreeing  with  our  present  text. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

22.  Iiy;;  ^  nnN:  "ly  "Untn  not  one  was  lacking."  in^^, 
though  not  in  the  constr.  state,  is  pointed  with  short  vowel  in 
the  ultima,  besides  in  this  passage,  in  Gen.  48:  22;  Is.  27:  12; 
Zech.  11:  7.  The  reason  for  this  is,  hard  to  assign.  See  Driver, 
ad  loc,  and  Ges.  96  (p.  282,  Remark).  On  the  analogy  of  the 
confusion  between  "jPIN  and  *]n^<  in  Gen.  22:  13  and  elsewhere 
one  might  venture  the  conjecture  here,  that  "iPiN  "11?  was  meant 
to  suggest  the  tM'o  readings  IH^^  "II?,  with  the  translation  given 
above,  and  "in5<  "ly  in  the  sense  ''till  after";  cf.  Neh.  13:  19; 
Lev.  14 :  43 ;  Jer.  41 :  16 ;  Job  42 :  7.  The  meaning  of  the  verse 
would  not  be  changed  by  this  rendering,  since  *in5<  "ly  is  prac- 
tically only  a  fuller  form  of  "ly,  and  for  "in^^,  defined  by  ^Z^^_, 
another  antecedent  of  the  relative  would  be  supplied  in  thought, 
which  would  be  equivalent  to   in^-    Another  possibility  is  that 

one  reading  was    '^'^'^  ly. 


54      ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 

3.     D^C^t^    n^bV   l^br    nny  ^3    ''For  now  are  there  ten 

•  T  -:  T  T  -:  T  T  - 

thousand  such  as  we."  The  sense  of  this  statement  in  the  present 
context  is  not  altogether  satisfying.  Vulgate  and  some  editions 
of  LXX  together  with  Symm.  read   nV)^  for  nDV-  "For  thou 

T    -  T  - 

art  the  like  of  us  (being)  ten  thousand,"  for  thou  art  worth  ten 
thousand  of  us ;  cf .  Driver,  ad  loc.  The  case  here  is  very  probably 
the  same  as  in  I  S.  28 :  2,  where  nH^  in  the  text  suggested  nn^, 

T    -  T  - 

which  there  was  in  accordance  with  the  more  usual  construction ; 
this  time  iiny  is  found  in  the  text,  and  suggests  by  sound  nn5<, 

T  -  T  - 

the  more  suitable  of  the  two. 

3.  "1^-iy^  "l^yp  ^lb  ^^'^^  ^2  ''That  thou  be  ready  to  succor 
us  out  of  the  city,"  R.  V.  Thus  if  Qere  "n1]y7  is  read,  though 
the  article  would  be  expected  with  1''y?0.  The  Ketih  cannot  very 
well  be  l^iy^  ^s  generally  given  by  commentators,  for  a  Hiph.  of 

i;-)]  is  doubtful  (BDB,  p.  740^) .  But  because  of  the  lack  of  the 
article  with  the  preceding  word  it  seems  not  unlikely  that  "l''i7T' 

•  T 

(originating  in  a  mere  blunder  of  copying)  should  be  the  Ketib. 
In  that  case  the  sense  would  be:  "That  we  should  have  thee  (as 
aid)  from  city  to  city."  But  the  reading  of  the  Greek  in  this 
place  is  significant;  A,  B,  and  L  all  represent  "I'^iy^  by  a  noun, 
and  read  ^^]^2  for  "1"'yD-  Whether  by  intention,  therefore,  or 
by  accident,  our  present  Hebrew  text  seems  to  be  a  mixture  of 
the  two  readings:  ^^^h  "TTD  ):h  n%"in  and  n^^D  U^  H^in 
^lyp.  It  must  be  admitted  that  the  two  traditions  do  not  become 
apparent  from  the  Hebrew  alone,  nor  can  it  be  said  that  the 
marginal  note  helps  a  great  deal  toward  making  clear  the  com- 
bination. Professor  Torrey's  suggestion  that  '^''1^7  combined 
*liy';5  of  the  Greek  reading  and  ^^])^  as  sequel  to  l'^]^!^,  is  the 

r    VT  •  T 

foundation  for  the  solution  offered  above. 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.      55 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

^2-     n.*)!?   n^5  in^^'^    "To  conduct  him  over  the  Jordan," 

R.  V.     Ketih    JTl^^ ;  Qere    \'l'yr\    r\^.     As  Driver  correctly 

points  out  (ad  loc),  we  have  here  a  mixture  of  two  readings,  as 
indicated  by  K.  and  Q.  above.  Either  construction  is  suitable, 
and  has  parallel :  K.  in  v.  19,  Q.  in  vv.  37,  40.  Greek  B  represents 
Q.,  while  L  has  K.    See  Introduction,  page  14. 

43.     ):h  ^t^  r]^Z'2  D^    "Or  hath  he  given  us  any  gift," 

R.  V.    The  fact  that  the  word  H^st^*^  has  called  forth  two  equally 

plausible  conjectures  seems  to  be  a  good  proof  that  the  combina- 
tion of  the  two  readings  contained  in  this  word  was  well  made. 
Driver,  in  his  note  on  this  verse,  suggests  the  reading    ^Z*2 

(inf.  abs.  Niph.)  for  H^^iS'^;  Gratz  (G.  d.  Juden,  L,  p.  287;,  fol- 
lowed by  H.  P.  Smith  (ad  loc),  proposes  to  read  ri^^*i2  "portion" 
or  ''gift".  Cf.  Ges.  76*'  and  Kon.  I.,  p.  632  f.  There  is  nothing 
in  the  combination  for  which  the  solution  cannot  be  found  in  the 
two  readings  proposed. 

CHAPTER  XX. 

5.  "in'"''^]  "And  he  tarried  longer."  Qere  ^^)^)=^^^^i  The 
Ketib  can  hardly  be  anything  else  than  /n^"^!;  cf.  I  S.  13:  8. 
There  is  no  root  IH"^  (see  Driver,  ad  loc).  And  how  else  should 
a  combination  of  the  two  forms  IH^^^l  and  bPi^')  have  been 
effected? 

6.  riD    nn5<    "Take  thou."     Greek  B  has   Kal  vvv  o-i  xd(3e,  A 

I-  T    - 

and  L  read  ^at  vvv  Xa/Se,     Compare  the  notes  on  18 :  3 ;  I  S.  28 :  2. 


56      ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

CHAPTER  XXI. 

4.  ^^  r^5  ''It  is  not  for  us."  Ketib  "f^  "for  me" ;  Qere  )^^ 
"for  us".  Q.  has  the  plur.  to  correspond  with  the  latter  part  of 
the  verse,  where  we  read  1^7   T^^V     The  whole  speech  of  the 

T      '    ••  : 

Gibeonites  could  have  been  put  either  in  the  sing,  or  plur.  with 
propriety.  The  sing,  would  then  have  been  considered  as  repre- 
senting the  statement  of  an  individual  voicing  the  sentiment  of 
the  mass.  It  is  probable  that  in  this  verse  some  authorities  had 
"'^  p^  in  both  places,  and  others  )y)  p^.  In  order  to  preserve 
both  these  readings  one  *'7   p^  and  one  )y^  T^^  were  kept  in 

the  text.  The  marginal  note  is  not  necessary  here,  since  the  text 
itself  makes  clear  the  combination,  but  may  have  been  put  in 
here  by  the  scribe  while  he  was  in  a  mood  of  more  scrupulous 
conscientiousness  than  ordinarily.  Cf.  I  S.  30 :  22,  where  the 
case  is  almost  identical,  but  where  the  margin  is  silent. 

9.   inon  Dm  "And  they  were  put  to  death."    Qere  )r)!2  HI^H) 

:  •.      T  ••  :  ••         T  ••  : 

with  this  translation:  "And  they  died";  Ketib  ^ppn  DHV  trans- 
lated as  above.  The  double  reading  here  evidently  affects  not 
only  Sni,  but  also  inDU-    Cf.  the  similar  cases  in  5 :  2  and  21: 

T  ••  :  :   : 

12.  The  two  forms  QH  and  H^T]  seem  to  be  "without  appreci- 
able  distinction  in  usage"  (see  further  BDB,  p.  241-'^).  Greek 
and  Syriac  read   IPipri- 

9.  nni;^  Tvp  n^'nn?  □•^j^'^^^b  t^j^  'P'?  "in  the 

days  of  harvest,  in  the  first  days,  at  the  beginning  of  barley 
harvest,"  R.  V.  Ketib  vbtlV);  Qere  rbr\r\2-  "p'^nn  is  per- 
fectly intelligible  as  the  accusative  of  circumstance,  without  the 
preposition  which  is  prefixed  by  the  Qre,"  H.  P.  Smith  (ad  loc). 
Evidently  both  K.  and  Q.  are  defensible.  But  it  seems  that  the 
whole  expression  is  too  full,  and  it  is  probable  that  we  have  here 
at  least  two  different  readings  combined,  or  rather  incorporated 
in  full.     One  seems  to  have  been    Q^^D'^^^IS    "T'lJD   ^12^2,    and 

•  T  -It       ■•     • 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.      57 

another  Cnyc'  ^'^♦p  P^nPZ;  ^vhile  a  third  may  have  been 
C^^i:*^<"in  ~1>*p  '^:^2  (see  Driver,. (1(1  h>c.)  The  Versions 
seem  to  support  strongly  the  Hebrew  text,  except  for  the  fact 
that  L  does  not  represent    C'JC*^<"^-■ 

12.  CnC^SM  Qu  ul'^n  1*C'^<  "Where  the  Philistines  had 
hanged  them."  Keilb  C^'^v^^S"  CC:  Qere  C^'lip'^T'^  r\^Z"- 
'■D^Pw'^D  occurs  much  more  frequently  than  D^nCi'*'!'^!"!:  but  the 
latter  is  found  (e.  g.,  I  4:  7;  7:  13),"  Driver,  ad  loc.  Compare 
the  note  on  v.  9. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

28.  ^"2i:''n  D^P"1  bv  "n'r^l  "But  thine  eyes  are  upon  the 
haughty,  that  thou  mayest  bring  them  down,"  R.  V.  "The  second 
clause  (of  the  verse)  gives  no  suitable  sense.  For  "l^^^'l 
D^D"T^y  read  ni^l  D"'^;;!  Ps."  H.  P.  Smith  (ad  loc).  But 
it  is  quite  evident  that  two  readings  have  here  been  combined ; 
one  b^BZ^Pi  D^^DI  ^ryi  "but  the  eyes  of  the  haughty  thou  wilt 
bring  down",  the  other  D^^l  bv  "^C'^^V]  ''but  thine  eyes  are 
against  the  haughty".  Greek  L  preserves  the  first  of  these 
readings:  kuI  oc^^uA/xots  v^j/rjXwv  TaTrtuoKrci?,  Syriac  renders  C'^J^^T 
'l^^Srn   nlD*1.  like  Ps.  18:  28. 

•   :    -  T 

43.  DI?p*15<;  Dp"]^.  'T  crushed  them,  I  spread  them  abroad." 
This  is  evidently  a  doublet.  The  Versions  have  only  one  verb. 
Ps.  has    Cp^"li<5.    Cf.  H.  P.  Smith,  ad  loc. 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

8.  ^k^6ti*'n  u5<h  "Chief  of  the  captains,"  R.  V.  These  two 
words  and  the  similar  expressions  in  vv.  13,  18  are  most  illu- 
minating and  instructive  as  regards  the  methods  employed  by 

Library  Publications.     J,. 


58      ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

the  Massoretes  in  combining  two  readings.  A  word  that  suits 
the  context  here  excellently  is  the  plural  of  C*''/^^*  "officer"  or 
"captain"  (cf.  Ex.  14:  7;  I  Kings  9:  22;  II  Kings  1:2).  It 
follows  naturally  upon  D'^'HS  jn  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  verse, 
and  evidently  must  be  taken  together  with  the  preceding  word. 
□'''^''PiS'n  C'^^*!  '  then,  "chief  of  the  captains",  is  one  of  the  alter- 
native readings  in  the  passage.  But  let  the  consonants  too  give 
their  testimony.  Grammatically,  it  would  be  possible  to  add  the  Q 
and  read  □''i^''';?kS*ri  i^^5<h  "chief  of  the  thirty"  (cf.  Driver,  ad 
loc.) .  The  sense,  too,  M^ould  be  satisfactory.  But  if  one  reading, 
as  already  found,  was  Ci;^'7t^S"i,  and  the  other  □"^u'StS'n,  why 
should  not  the-Q  have  been  written  in  the  text?  If  the  □  was 
not  put  into  the  text,  it  must  mean  that  at  least  in  one  reading- 
it  should  be  left  out.  The  natural  conjecture  is  uC'VL^'n.  re- 
placing  the  "i  with  H.     That    would    give    us    nC^'lt^Ti    i^'^^l, 

"chief  of  the  three",  grammatically  correct  and  suitable  to  the 
context.  The  three  here  referred  to  are  of  course  those  named 
in  vv.  8 — 12,  Joshebbasshebbeth,  Eleazar,  and  Shammah.  When 
all  the  circumstances  are  weighed,  there  can  no  longer  be  any 
doubt  that  this  is  the  second  alternative  reading.  It  should  be 
noted  here  that  L  has  -n-pwros  twv  Tpiwv.  It  is  perhaps  profitable 
also  to  compare  the  situation  in  I  Chr,  11:  11  and  12:  19,  which 
are  parallels  to  this  passage.  In  both  of  these  places  the  text 
has  Ctvl'i^C^'ri  C^'J^h.  and  the  margin  directs  us  to  read  as  one 
choice  D^i^' viS'n  i^*^5"l  "chief  of  the  captains".  Note  that  here 
the  C  >  belonging  to  both  readings,  is  put  into  the  text.  One 
cannot  help  but  ask,  why  the  Massoretes  placed  a  marginal  note 
against  the  passages  in  I  Chronicles,  while  in  II  S.  23 :  8  (a 
similar  combination^  they  did  not.  The  answer  may  be  this,  that 
C^t^'l'i^u*"    in  I  Chr.,  if  pointed  with  the  vowels  of  the  word  for 

•    T     - 

captains,  could  very  easily  be  considered  an  example  of  the  acci- 
dental lengthening  of  *>  to  1.  Thus,  probably  one  of  the  two 
traditions  would  have  been  lost,  unless  the  margin  had  been 
serving  as  safeguard.    Cf.  vv.  13,  18. 


ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL.      59 

8.  ir\^  2y?3  "At  one  time."  Kctlb  -l^^5;  Qerc  pn{<. 
□  y2  is  fem.,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  masc.  form  IPIX 
was  intended  to  suggest  as  a  variant  for  this  expression  the 
phrase  "in^<  DV2  "in  one  dajj". 

13.  i:;^^  D^'cb'^f'r^  W'^^jb'C:  ^^yl  "And  three  of  the 
thirty  chief  men  went  down,"  R.V.  Ket^b  W^'^^Z' ;  Qere   HC'^PC:'. 

•    •  T  T        : 

In  this  case  there  can  be  no  doubt  whatever  as  to  what  K.  is.  It 
must  be  C"'u'?C%  foi"  it  would  make  nonsense  to  say  "thirty  of 

the  thirty".  The  translation  given  above  is  that  of  Q.;  K.  would 
be :  ''and  certain  captains  of  the  thirty  went  down".  Note  that 
though  the  same  words  are  combined  here  as  in  v.  8,  except  for 
the  article,  the  combination  is  different.  In  v.  8  the  consonants 
stood  for  nC'^/C^*  and  the  vowels  for  □''i-''/I^'-    Here  the  case  is 

T        :  •    •  T  • 

reversed.  This  cannot  be  considered  simply  an  accident,  for  the 
reason  seems  apparent.  If  this  combination  had  stood  in  v.  8 
with  the  Qei^e  it  has  here,  it  would  have  been  impossible  to  decide 
whether  the  alternative  reading  should  be  D'^C'^C'n  or  C^'^u  m- 
But  here  no  such  uncertainty  need  exist  on  account  of  the  fol- 
lowing word.     Cf.  the  note  on  v.  8*.     B  has    kuI    Karip-qirav   TpeU 

uTTi)    TOJV    TpLaKOi'Ta;     L     K'it-     KdTefSrjmiv     r/jei?     eK     tm\'     rptwr    (i/j;^wi';     SyriaC 

18.  ^u'Sc''"  'C'i^"!  "Chief  of  the  three",  R.  V.  Ket^' C^^cb\^r\ 
"the  thirty";  Qe/e  n'\Lfbz*^\  "the  three".  Cf.  the  situation  here 
with  vv.  8,  13.  We  should  expect  here  the  Q  to  be  written  in 
the  text  at  the  end  of  the  word  (see  rule  4,  p.  22) .  The  reason 
it  is  excluded  from  the  text  seems  to  be  the  fact  that  the  vowels 
of  the  two  readings  are  so  similar  that  if  the  consonants  were 
allowed  to  stand  for  □'•tp'^^I^'lj  alone,  the  vowels  could  not  be 
expected  to  indicate  the  alternative,  "C'^u  H .  clearly  enough. 
Now,  part  of  the  vowels  and  part  of  the  consonants  stand  for 
each  reading.  Evidently  rule  2,  Introduction,  p.  22,  has  had  to 
vield  in  this  case  to  the  rule  of  clearness. 


60      ALTERNATIVE  READINGS  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  SAMUEL. 

CHAPTER  XXIV. 

4.  b^nn  nt^'  bv)  2^r  b^  Tj'^r^n  n:}"n  pinn  "But  the 

king's  word  prevailed  against  Joab,  and  against  the  captains 
of  the  host."  Two  traditions  are  here  preserved,  one  with  "^^^^ 
throughout,  and  one  with   bV-     Cf .  2  :  9. 

13.  T|D"lh  5^im  TiniJ  ^;iC^  "Before  thy  foes  while  they 
pursue  thee",  R.  V.  This  verse  combines  the  sing,  and  the  plur. 
in  a  way  similar  to  that  in  I  S.  30 :  22  and  II  S.  21 :  4.  Cf.  also 
I  S.  24 :  5 ;  26 :  8.  Syriac  has  sing,  in  both  places,  while  Greek 
has  plur.  uniformly.  One  tradition  must  have  been  T]"''!!,*  ^32^ 
Tj^Dnh  DmI,  the  other  T|p"in  sXIHT  "n^»  ^;^^b- 


BS1325.2.B74 

Alternative  readings  ir  the  Hebrew  of 


